In 2000, a band of semi-trained young men in a rubber dinghy
blew a hole in the U.S.S. Cole,
a multi-billion dollar ship of war, shocking the world, killing over a
dozen sailors, and making global headlines. Measured in terms of the
cost of the attack versus the damage inflicted, the return on investment
proved to be astronomical. A terrorism budget of
less than $100,000 did
millions of dollars in damage and purchased the equivalent of a massive
international advertising campaign that bolstered the notoriety of Al
Qaeda, the group responsible, to historic heights.
John Robb, an entrepreneur and former air force captain expounded on this military and economic discrepancy in his 2007 book
Brave New War:
networked combatants whose inexpensive attacks cause outsized damage
and disruption to a vulnerable, rich society dependent on extensive
trade networks and worldwide political arrangements. Robb writes:
The
nation-state is now bound up in a straitjacket of constraints. The core
of its strength, its ability to marshal resources and take actions that
exceed the power of any smaller organization, has been made
increasingly impotent.
...
[The] cozy
and highly regulated market of warfare characterized by wars between
state oligopolies is eroding because of these constraints... [The]
result is a new, competitive market for warfare more akin to the years
before the
Thirty Years’ War
than to our recent past. The participants in this new market are small
adroit nonstate competitors and occasional allies — guerilla/terrorist
groups, paramilitaries, and private military companies — and they are in
the process of rewriting the rules of warfare.”
The
brazenness of the attack on the Cole, and the fact that non-state
actors achieved it, signified an historic change. The American military
turned to the private sector for assistance in fighting this new
asymmetric war against mostly non-state foes. Erik Prince, the founder of
Blackwater Worldwide, soon after won the company’s first Federal contract to provide security training for sailors.
Turning
to a private military company for support may have been a consequence
of the general policy trend at the time — the notion that government
services could be
privatized while still being funded by tax revenues
had become popular with both parties, albeit with some controversy —
but it would eventually snowball into a far larger industry in the wake
of the attacks of 9/11/2001. During the Afghan and second Iraqi wars,
modern mercenaries would make their mark.
By ideology,
convention, and international law, modern governments have generally
eschewed the use of mercenary companies in favor of national
militaries.
The era of monarchies made greater general
use of mercenaries than later popular governments, for various reasons.
The ideology of popular government rests on the notion of the shared
rights and responsibilities of citizens, whereas an aristocratic society
may have neither the financial resources nor manpower to either
maintain a standing army nor raise one on short notice without paying
for it.
The Knights Templar were a sort of a medieval
Academi
(the new brand name of Blackwater Worldwide), originally charged by the
Vatican with providing security to Christian pilgrims following the
First Crusade.
The militia tradition of the United States and especially the
levée en masse
established during the French Republic broke with common military
practices, and the two World Wars further established the norm of using
mass conscription instead of professional military units to fight wars.
Modern
mercenary companies avoid the use of the word ‘mercenary,’ and
newspaper writers avoid using the word when referring to members of
“security services providers.” This is a useful legalistic evasion of
the terms of the
United Nations Mercenary Convention.
While the United States has never signed the convention — and plenty of
the signatories, like Liberia, are incapable of enforcing it even on
their own territory — a number of developed countries are signatories
and domestic political debate in the United States recognizes the norm
behind the convention by refusing to call mercenary companies what they
are in plain language.
The Geneva Conventions also
have a section
stating that none of the protections otherwise afforded to prisoners of
war apply to mercenaries. The law considers mercenaries to be ‘
unlawful combatants,’
and as such, American companies are careful to operate within the
arcane confines of international law, generally providing logistics
support to client militaries, along with securing facilities &
high-value individuals.
All of this makes it extremely
challenging to start and run a mercenary company in the modern world,
even though it’s technically the ‘second oldest profession’ in history.
It’s illegal, or at least frowned upon, to practice the trade openly.
There are limitations on the procurement of tools for employees,
conducting training is politically difficult, and the press usually
considers the trade to be morally abhorrent. Despite this, the economic
factors in play have begun to overpower the legal and cultural
resistance to the re-emergence of private soldiering.
The conflict that reintroduced the mercenary to public awareness in America was the aftermath of
Operation Iraqi Freedom
— the largest American military occupation since the Vietnam War. The
all-volunteer American military, lacking in manpower or the ability to
increase staffing on short notice, turned to private companies to
provide logistics and support. The economic consequences of the
abolition of the draft in 1973 became apparent as the occupation began
to drag on far longer than American war planners had initially
predicted. Politicians could no longer increase the number of boots on
the ground at the stroke of a pen — it was now necessary to bring out
the public checkbook.
The American private military
industry resurged during the Iraq and Afghan wars, as substantial
portions of the increase in the defense budget following the attacks on
9/11/2001 wound up in the coffers of defense firms. According to a
2011 paper by the Center for Strategic and International Studies,
by 2010, almost 40% of all defense budget spending was on defense
contractors, largely in military services. By 2006, a census recorded
over
100,000 military contractors
living and working in Iraq for the occupying authority. In the words of
representative Henry Waxman of California during a 2007
congressional hearing on Blackwater:
“We
know that sergeants in the military generally cost the Government
between $50,000 to $70,000 per year. We also know that a comparable
position at Blackwater costs the Federal Government over $400,000, six
times as much.”
Private military firms in
the U.S. recruit much of their staff directly from the Department of
Defense: the publicly-financed military effectively subsidizes the
training that provides these companies with their talent. The firms that
are working for the U.S. government are usually heavily regulated, with
their weapons carefully tracked, and in most situations are under the
direct command of military authorities.
“[The
U.S. government hires Private Military Contractors] because they truly
don't have the manpower or the logistics capability to fulfill those
missions. So really the company becomes like a very robust temp agency
operating very much under the command and control of the government.”
This
political aspect of the private military industry is changing. As the
American commitments in Afghanistan and Iraq wind down, private military
companies are finding new roles in the international ‘bazaar of
violence.’ The increase in piracy in the Gulf of Aden and in the Indian
Ocean, along with the relative difficulty that national navies have had
in providing effective security in the region, have reintroduced the old
historical and economic role for both mercenaries and merchant marines.
When pirate attacks threatened to drive up insurance costs for shipping
in the area, major shipping insurance companies banded together to both
lobby to loosen international regulations on arming ship crews and to
fund a private naval force to defend against pirate attacks.
British PMCs in particular have begun to establish themselves in the trade, as have firms from
India and Sri Lanka. Some American companies like
AdvanFort even publish
press releases
of their military exploits, complete with posed photos of mercenaries
in action, ideal for sharing on Facebook. Simon Murray, the chairman of
the massive international conglomerate
GlenCore,
has also started a firm called Typhon to patrol the area. Unlike the
Private Military Contractors (PMCs) that made headlines during the Iraqi
and Afghan wars, these firms are less public-private in essence and are
more private companies serving other private companies for private
purposes.
In interviews regarding Typhon’s plans, representatives have described the role of their private navy as
acting more like ‘burglar alarms’
to alert nearby ships of possible threats. Rather than traveling
alongside the navies of nation-states, the private fleets operate on the
schedules and routes of the private cargo vessels targeted by the
pirates. The company has described itself as the ‘first naval-grade
private convoy protection in 220 years.’
On the ground, mercenary armies like the Puntland Maritime Police Force have run into
difficulties with funding and politics,
as occurred with the Puntland company when its backers in the United
Arab Emirates and the United States withdrew funding, leaving behind
thousands of unpaid mercenaries in Somalia. When an internet startup
goes bankrupt, all that’s left are a bunch of Aeron chairs and some
computer equipment. When a mercenary company goes bankrupt, the hired
guns start to look for new employment and entertainment.
There’s even a
trade group representing maritime security providers — the Security Association for the Maritime Industry — which has been endorsed by
Lloyd’s of London,
one of the most prestigious and successful insurance firms in the
world. SAMI lists dozens upon dozens of PMCs from countries ranging from
Estonia to Germany, Singapore, the Netherlands, and Switzerland. While
these companies may prefer the PMC acronym to describe themselves, in
historical terms, they’re essentially
privateers.
Many of the companies listed claim to have been founded quite recently —
many between 2000-2010. Some prefer more reserved,
professional-sounding branding, others, like the
Marine Pirate Busters, prefer a little more bombast.
Since the growth of PMCs in the area, the United Nations
reported this year that there have been no Somali hijackings in the region
since 2012. Unlike the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan which had
challenging, idealistic strategic incentives and non-economic
motivation, the conflict in Somalia has clearly defined costs in the
form of insurance payouts to hijackers, which makes it easier for
private companies to calibrate what resources to expend on resolving the
threat.
In an
interview with the blog PiracyDaily, Terrence McKnight, the former commander of
Task Force 151,
the international naval force set up in 2009 to deter pirate attacks
off the coast of Somalia, spoke of the difficulties that private
security companies face in one of the next potential security vacuums on
the seas off of West Africa, North Africa, and in the Middle East:
“This
is something that the world communities have got to get a handle on. We
know we want to stop piracy. We know we don't have enough naval ships
out there to protect all the fleets—so we have these armed security
teams. So, how do we now implement them? If we have all these
restrictions, then they can’t do it. We've seen the success story that,
since 2009 and the arrival of these security teams, there has not been a
ship hijacked yet that has had an armed security team. So it is a
success story. So (we need to) take that success and figure out how do
we organize these teams so that the host country has some say in it and
also, that we protect the crew that man the ships.”
Facing
resource constraints, the U.S. and other allied governments are
becoming less capable of providing security on sea lanes. Further,
foreign governments are perhaps understandably jumpy at the prospect of
permitting heavily-armed privateers to use their waters. Diplomats know
how to speak to other diplomats, but conducting diplomacy with dozens of
private security corporations is not the same. Similarly,
nationally-managed navies are not necessarily structured in such a way
that they're capable of fighting non-state foes (like poor pirates armed
with cheap rocket launchers piloting zodiacs) in an economically
efficient way.
When John Robb wrote Brave New War in 2007, he predicted that by 2016:
“...The
first casualty [of a black swan event] in the United States will be the
ultra-bureaucratic U.S. Department of Homeland Security, which, despite
its new extralegal surveillance powers, will prove unable to defuse the
threats against us... Furthermore, the extra police powers that it will
be granted in the wake of these attacks will be counterproductive
because these powers will only serve to divide the United States and
generate a significant base of domestic dissent and vociferous debate.
[...]
Security
will become a function of where you live and whom you work for, much as
health care is allocated already. Wealthy individuals and multinational
corporations will be the first to bail out of our collective system,
opting instead to hire private military companies, such as Blackwater
and Triple Canopy, to protect their homes and facilities and to
establish a protective perimeter around daily life.
[...]
Members
of the middle class will soon follow, taking matters into their own
hands by forming suburban collectives to share the costs of security.”
With the public debate surrounding the revelations of
Edward Snowden
— himself, essentially, a former cyber-mercenary working on contract
for the National Security Agency — in early 2013, fulfilling at least
some of Robb’s predictions for the future of security, it may be
sensible to take notice of them now. Lest he be dismissed as a crank
author, no less a representative of mainstream thinking than
David Brooks saw fit to blurb the book jacket, and
James Fallows, writer for
The Atlantic and winner of the National Book Award, wrote the foreword.
In another continuation of this trend towards private provision of security in the U.S.,
The San Francisco Gate reported in September that the
private law enforcement industry has been earning hundreds of new subscribers
in Oakland, supplementing the over-extended public police force. Like
mercenaries elsewhere, current laws prevent them from taking over the
functions of their publicly-financed authorities — but perhaps as has
happened elsewhere in the world, the sheer demand for safety will cause
laws to shift. The price cited for protection is $20 per month.
Source:
priceonomics.com
