September 16, 2019
Username:
 In GLICA2019: Private Military Contractors

Delegation of Germany

DISEC

Private Military Contractors

 

Background: In the past, diplomatic conventions such as the Munich Security Conference have repeated the sentiment that national governments are the sole proprietors of world security. As recently as 2010, however, the self-proclaimed “deciders of war and peace” have been outsourcing their government monopoly on peace to the private sector. Back in 2010, when the United Nations prepared to expand their operations in Afghanistan, there were some less publicized backroom dealings in the works to increase security presence in regions such as Pakistan, where UN relief workers have been the target of kidnappings and killings.

 

Policy: Germany is a strong supporter for the use of private military and security companies, or PMSCs, and has actively urged the United Nations to grant contracts to more PMSCs as their demand becomes more prominent. Like most countries, Germany has had a policy shift dating back to 2010, where once we would refer to military endeavors as a strict government responsibility, the international community, Germany included, now feels as though international peace must be delegated to private service providers. Along with the changes in international security forces, Germany also urges the adoption of transparency from within said private military organizations. An existing lack of transparency can only pave the road to potential corruption, and to avoid future logistical issues, it’s important to stress the consequences of not increasing transparency with PMSCs, especially in countries where political and military corruption is left unchecked. To compete with the growing international demand for PMSCs, shown with a combined total of over 250,000 private military soldiers being deployed in countries such as Afghanistan and Iraq, it is also important to redefine government responsibility in relation to international conflict. Germany has taken an extensive approach in changing what defines “core military responsibilities,” more specifically, who may be commissioned to do what, seen in their increased oversight and advisory from Transparency International Germany.

 

Solutions: To enact a resolution that capitalizes on both the economic and military benefit of PMSCs, while also mitigating the adverse effects such as potential corruption, we must first look at what political and regulatory framework has already been executed. Governments that utilize PMSCs must introduce regulation and quality control for the adoption process of private military contractors. There is a responsibility put on said nations to uphold basic judicial and criminal justice systems to both establish and provides safeguards against PMSCs that violate both contracts with client governments and international law, as dictated by the United Nations and the Geneva Convention.

 

https://www.globalpolicy.org/pmscs/50225-pmscs-a-the-un.html

https://www.un.org/press/en/2018/gashc4246.doc.htm

https://foreignpolicy.com/2010/01/17/u-n-embraces-private-military-contractors/

https://www.perseus-strategies.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/Contracting-for-Stability-The-Potential-Use-of-Private-Military-Contractors-as-a-United-Nations-Rapid-Reaction-Force.pdf

 

https://www.transparency.org/news/pressrelease/private_military_and_security_companies_a_call_for_better_regulation

 

  • Caleb Bartes

Start typing and press Enter to search