In the last several decades the notion of outsourcing military service to groups, categorized as
private military corporations, has become an increasing trend. Governments have been outsourcing these contractors to provide military and security services in unstable regions of the world, but have been causing more controversy than solution.
Blackwater USA,(pictured left) a private military contractor primarily stationed in Iraq and Afghanistan, has been accused of their involvement in civilian deaths, which has made it hard to justify the need for and effectiveness these companies. The problem with outsourcing security services is that companies, such as Blackwater, are not held accountable for their actions and are beyond the reach of any legitimate authority, making it unclear on how to punish them, if at all able, for any unlawful acts. The
international laws surrounding hired military contractors are not clearly defined, making it hard to know under which jurisdiction these companies operate. If something is not done to tighten regulations on
privatization, the existence of these companies abroad could start to become dangerous.
Private military corporations (PMCs) have been used for many years providing a variety of security services ranging from peacekeeping and post war civil training to armed site security and weapons destruction. PMCs are hired and work under government contracts. The “employees” of these corporations are tactically trained and have developed specific skills that solidify their effectiveness abroad. Traditionally, they are seen as an extension of the military force already deployed in a specific country. Many people
argue that the most powerful military groups, such as the U.S., are extremely dependent on PMCs and cannot effectively function without the use of their services. Others, like the UN, oppose the outsourcing of force and are not impressed with their attempts at peacekeeping, as it is something that requires much "more sensitivity" than what PMCs operate with.
The
controversy surrounding Blackwater USA stems from whether the specific conduct of Blackwater has overstepped U.S. efforts in the War in Iraq.
Reports of civilian killings, such as

the Nisour Square shootings in Baghdad on September 16th, where twenty-eight Iraqi civilians were killed, have caused people to second guess the motives behind this particular private contractor and have held very few people responsible for these actions. Some criticisms focus on the fact that there have been hundreds of killings, both documented and undocumented, which have not yet been explained. Reports indicate that, “since 2005 Blackwater operatives in Iraq have opened fire on at least 195 occasions. In more than 80% of these instances, the Blackwater agents fired first.”
Eric Prince,(pictured right) the co-founder of Blackwater, spoke last week in front of a Congressional
committee and admitted for the first time that his men stationed in Iraq have “acted inappropriate at all times.” Compared to the devastation these civilian shootings have caused the families of the victims, simply stating that they acted inappropriately does not seem like a suitable answer. The details of the incidents are under investigation and until then, it is up to the Justice Department to prosecute the Blackwater employees for their actions. There are very few direct consequences to the PMCs actions, thus, there is very little keeping them from committing more unlawful acts.
It is my opinion that while militaries depend on the services of these private military

corporations, there are far too many flaws in their foundation for them to be considered an effective entity. Until these PMCs(shown left), like Blackwater, can establish clear accountability, which can be agreed upon internationally, they should not be allowed to operate abroad. If contractors misbehave, as they have done so far in Iraq, they rarely face charges. Blackwater chose to “fire” the man in charge of operations during the Iraqi civilian shootings, but he was not charged with anything. This needs to change. By creating a set of international laws, these PMCs can be more closely regulated, decreasing the probability of any more “mistakes” in the future.
1 comment:
Your post was quite informative and brought light to a great topic of concern. You did an excellent job interweaving secondary sources into your post as well, making it easier to understand such a complex issue. I feel the article on the reports of civilian killings really adds substance to your argument. I would, however, suggest that you change your link on Erik Prince, because although Wikipedia can provide good information, it is not really considered very credible. But besides, that you links are strong.
After finishing reading your post, I was left with a couple of questions. For instances, you say that “until these PMCs, like Blackwater can establish clear accountability…they should not be allowed to operate abroad.” My question to you is, how do you suppose these PMCs can build accountability. Including your opinion on how this can be done might broaden your argument. I also feel you could go deeper into saying what the international laws should entail that will decrease the probability of more mistakes. Other than that your post was great.
Post a Comment