From Mercenary to UN Contractor?

Abstract

This chapter examines an evolving international military labour market. The general argument is that the conspicuous prejudice widely attached to non-state mercenarism and military support does not withstand analytical rigour. States and their predecessors have always employed both private and public labour in armed conflict. This arrangement has been ubiquitous over centuries and continues today. The second section contains an analysis of connotations attached to mercenaries and their often misrepresented past. The third section examines some persistent classification problems arising from an industry with a broad and sometimes ambiguous range of roles. The fourth describes several types of hitherto unidentified state mercenarism — a simple conceptual step but one curiously absent from the literature. The fifth examines the confusing posture of the UN, which alternates between criticisms of PMSCs on one hand, while hiring some of their services on the other. The sixth section provides a taxonomy that includes modern varieties of civilian logistic support and related services. The seventh condenses into a few pages contractor virtues that an advocate is likely to believe and promote; then lists several examples of services the UN might gainfully outsource. The summary steps back somewhat from the buoyant prognostications of the latter section, mindful that the following two chapters explore contrasting risks that suggest a more cautious assessment.

Until the UN establishes the concept of rapidly deployable forces, or as a minimum a rapidly deployable headquarters element to fill that initial vacuum, UN PSOs [peace support operations] will deploy against a strong counter current. PMCs are formed entities — they are responsive. Their force structures are already identified, their logistical and administrative tails organised. They have a leadership cadre ready to deploy. This is their core business rationale. They have personnel who are motivated to serve; they have personnel who are experienced, who are trained, who are physically equipped, and who are disciplined.

J.D. Jefferies¹