Mercenaries and Mayhem: The World of Private Military Corporations and the Need for

By. Alexandra Valdez

DOI: 10.57912/28756313

---

In a world where the line between soldier and citizen blurs more every day, the rise of private military corporations (PMCs) is challenging the world’s definition of war and justice. PMCs specialize in a variety of activities including combat operations, strategic planning, intelligence collection, and training. Among the largest are Academi of the United States and, most famously, Wagner used by Russia, both having major influence around the world, including in Sudan, the Central African Republic, Libya, Ukraine, Iraq, and Venezuela. Because two global powerhouses are using these PMCs, the lack of regulation and supervisory laws allows them to act with impunity, jeopardizing the security of millions. To protect the lives of citizens around the world, the international community needs to implement globally accepted agreements, training programs, citizen protection programs, data analysis, and administrative frameworks. 

PMCs first arose in the late 1970s following the Geneva Protocols, which sought to put an end to the general ongoing use of mercenary groups. With their existence being deemed illegal, mercenary forces moved to work in the grey areas of conflict, such as conflict zones without formal war declarations and unofficial arms dealings, hiring themselves out to engage in a variety of international conflicts on behalf of larger actors. Business expanded exponentially, bringing in profits from their expertise in military training. Despite little change in the function of mercenaries and PMCs, these new groups have received less pushback from the international community. Now, due to the passive acceptance of their existence and the actions they commit, they influence not only the skills of the armed forces they are hired to train but also the safety and security of civilians.

Today, more than 150 PMCs offer their services in over 50 countries, operating mostly unchecked despite clear signs of the need to rein in their behavior. Yet, major actors such as Russia and the United States continue to condone and benefit from these actions, failing to hold these groups accountable.

One example is Academi. Originally named Blackwater and used to train in-country security groups, this group has expanded over the years and has continued to commit atrocities unabated, despite being regulated through the Arms Export Control Act and the prohibiting of exporting defense services. In their tirade,  Academi has violated international and local laws governing their authority, disregarded local populations, and mistreated detainees and prisoners. Beyond that, they’ve amassed countless accusations of torture, war crimes, and sexual abuses against civilians in non-war zones. Despite this, the U.S. has enabled their behavior, with President Donald Trump pardoning contractors following an incident in 2007 that killed over a dozen Iraqi civilians.

Another such example is the state-funded PMC Wagner in Russia, which has been used as a proxy since 2014 to give the government plausible deniability for military actions and operations abroad, hiding the true casualties of Russia’s foreign interventions from the public eye. Despite the group’s ongoing pattern of mass executions, rape, mass graves, enforced disappearances, exploitation of natural resources, child abductions, and even the executions of Wagner defectors, their behavior is largely unrecognized. On top of that, this group has continuously used money laundering fronts not directly affiliated with the Kremlin to maneuver around Western sanctions and bolster the Russian government’s claim of plausible deniability. 

While PMCs may be a mainstay in the international system, their harm to civilians and human rights abuses doesn’t have to be. To mitigate them, unified action must be taken, with the ultimate goal being the successful regulation of PMCs in the short-term and the end of their use completely in the long-term. However, suggesting this as a single-step solution would not only be infeasible, but it would also fail to consider the complexities that go into their existence. As such, international actors must implement a series of steps that can lead to the eventual proper regulation of these groups.

First, an effective global regulatory body to monitor and prosecute violators of international law must be established. While international law is currently upheld by the International Criminal Court (ICC), the ICC’s lack of a concrete enforcement mechanism hinders its ability to demand accountability from states for their crimes. Similarly, the United Nations adopted the International Convention against the Recruitment, Use, Financing, and Training of Mercenaries in 1989, an agreement that–in theory–prohibits the formation of these groups. Yet, again, the actual execution of this fails. To remedy this issue, the ICC should increase outreach to governmental bodies, using diplomatic efforts to influence and pressure actors into following conduct rules established under already existing treaties such as this and to hold each other accountable on its behalf. By also creating a licensing system to uphold this, it would ultimately ensure that existing mercenary groups “on the radar” for the international community are held to the same standard as other organizations.

An additional step that can be taken after this could be implementing a mutual monitoring system between countries, such as the United States and Russia. Working similarly to mutual nuclear weapon tracking systems implemented in the New START Treaty, this could work to hold each other accountable through sanctions and civil compliance punishments against the groups and government officials found consorting with them.

Furthermore, international regulatory laws should be updated to better take into account what specific parameters are currently needed to pave a realistic way for international actors to take. Finally, the Rome Statute of the ICC should be updated to include a larger mention of mercenary groups as actors committing crimes of aggression. By accomplishing this, the ICC can more easily hold these groups accountable through legal processes, ensuring that loopholes are less exploitable. It would also make it easier to deploy UN peacekeeping troops into these areas to assist in protecting the lives of citizens. All of this together would give the ICC and the United Nations greater strength to guarantee the regulation of existing PMCs and the protection of citizens' rights.

Finally, to properly deal with countries who refuse to follow these rules and regulations, a collection of target sanctions should be instituted alongside trade restrictions, licensing restrictions, and ICC investigation and prosecution.

The regulation of PMCs is not just a matter of accountability anymore, but a matter of rescuing ethics. It’s up to the world now to form a collective front against the continual misconduct committed by PMCs, determining whether atrocities like this will continue further and whether the human rights of people around the world will be preserved or destroyed.