Private military company

History

One of the first privately held companies of intervention was Executive Outcomes in South Africa, which was divided into several organizations at the end of the Années 1990.

With the the United Kingdom, most known is Sandline International, symbol of the rise of the private companies. It offered as of the years 1990 a broad range of services active of the drive of troops to the maintenance or the restoration of safety.

In 1995, company MPRI with 350 employees and a military potential of 7000 men contributed efficiently to the modernization of the Croatian Armée which enabled him to reverse in a decisive way the power struggle with the Serb République of Krajina.

In 2005, several of these companies helped the military Engineering for the helps after the passage of the Ouragan Katrina on the New-Orleans.

Advantages for the governments

To call upon a private military company has several advantages for a government. That allows:

cause a drop in the cost of an armed intervention;
not to officially engage its army in a conflict;
to make decrease the official figure of dead during an military operation (case of the the United States in Iraq);
for certain governments which do not have an army of confidence , to have effective and trained men.

Risks

The risks to call upon a private military company can be numerous, and are due to the character mercenary of these troops.

There exists moreover one gap in the law with regard to them. Thus, it there no law explaining clearly:

their site in the military hierarchy;
what it occurs if an employee refuses to work if it considers that its safety is concerned too much; (however, certain contracts stipulate that they can all stop if they think that their safety is concerned too much)
the legal mode applied if an employee voluntarily kills or by accident a Civil;
etc

Moreover, it arrived several times that employees of these companies are mingled with doubtful businesses (like the Racket and the traffic of teenagers in ex-Yugoslavia and Torture in the Prison of Abu Ghraib) whereas they were in intervention.

Economic weight

In 2006, the whole of the private military companies have an annual sales turnover of 100 billion Dollar S per annum including 52 billion dollars to the the United States and that increases each year.

The Department off Defense (DoD) envisaged privatiser from here 2006,237 000 stations in the Logistique and the support. That will do doubtless as many jobs of created, at least partly, in the United States.

Zones of intervention

The use of the SMP is generalized by the United States: their employees constitute the second quota engaged in Iraq (15 000 men), in front of the British army .

It was also called upon their services inter alia in Colombia, in Ecuador, Bosnia, with the Kosovo, in Afghanistan, Sierra Leone, with the Nigeria and in Uganda.

In France

The deputy PS Jean-Pierre Plancade declared at the time of the debates on the relative bill with the repression of the mercenary activity: the private military companies can organize and ensure, at the request of a State or a company, tasks of safety, logistics, information, training of the soldiers, to compensate the governmental forces for certain occasions. These companies are characterized by the range from the services which they are able to propose . Parliamentary report 142 (2002-2003) written by the senator UMP Michel Pelchat († 2004) for the Commission of the foreign affairs stipulates as for him that: the assistance and the council with a foreign army, including when it emanates from private speakers, cannot be comparable with the mercenariat.

In a article published in Armed with Today in July 2004, the Chief of staff of the armies (CEMA), the general Henri Bentégeat declares: This private military companies question is rather delicate and evolves/moves very quickly. The majority are companies which have well-established, which is controllable, controlled and which can render services that the armies cannot return for various reasons; some, unfortunately, do not have a sufficient ethical code.