mercenaries or contractors?

You should be using the correct term by now!

Mercenaries V Contractors

Although not a new concept, the number of private security firms, and the scope of work they can provide has greatly expanded in recent years. It is wrong to think of these corporations as a new breed of mercenaries. These "armies for hire" can provide a variety of services; advice, training, equipping, maintenance, logistics and when needed, some can and will engage in combat operations.

There are three major differences between these new corporate armies and mercenaries of old.

First: - They are business ventures foremost, not a venture for individual profit or excitement.
Second: - These corporations, at least those based in western states, do not take contracts that are in direct opposition to their country's national interest.
Third: - Again for those based in western countries, they maintain a high level of professionalism and profess to adhere to internationally accepted norms of operations.

Undoubtedly, many of the individuals who work for these corporations do so as a matter of patriotism. They are retired military who see this new line of work as a continuation of their chosen profession. The danger in this lies in the increasingly complex nature of defining what is a country's national interest. In areas where international interests are not clearly defined, these corporations will have opportunities that fall in the gray area of neither being totally within, nor directly opposed to their home country's interest.

The New Face of Military Assistance

A natural evolution of these corporate armies for hire has occurred in Africa. Several corporations have and will provide security assistance to governments. If warranted these companies will participate in combat operations. Press reports on these companies are mixed: some praise their capability at restoring order in countries threatened by rebel movements, as was the case in both Sierra Leone and Angola, other reports still view them as a group of mercenaries which eventually will cause problems in the region. Negative reporting on such companies usually links these corporations with being paid for their services by mineral or oil concessions from the government. A situation that is reminiscent of the days of colonialism.
One point that all media accounts agree on, is that these corporations have been very effective, at least for the short-term, in assisting governments maintain stability. They employ professional, experienced soldiers, mostly from Africa. From the company's point of view, it is more cost effective, and saves more lives, for a government to hire them to assist a teetering government before it collapses, than it is to send in a peacekeeping force after a violent fight has subsided.

Companies that provide security services are actively looking to expand their business. These companies emphasize that they only take contracts that are under the auspices of a legitimate government or entity (i.e., the United Nations), and that do not oppose the interest of the home government. Foreign companies view their US competitors as military assistance corporations. In their view, the difference between their companies and their US competitors, is that they have the capability to train, equip, or deploy a combat force if needed. In several instances foreign company advisors fought either with the units being trained or in a separate unit alongside the host government forces. If requested, such companies could respond to a humanitarian crisis, with a 300 man force, complete with communications, logistics, medical and close air support. This force would be to stabilize the situation and assist in humanitarian efforts until a UN peacekeeping force arrived.
The services provided by these types of companies are a growth industry. There have been small-scale operations in the Far East and some companies are now actively seeking to gain military assistance contracts with South American governments. Other companies with similar capabilities have reportedly been formed in Israel, France and Brazil. MPRI, Vinnell and smaller US based companies are also seeking contracts to aid militaries around the world, albeit without the combat capability of these more robust corporate entities.

Today’s world is a far cry from the 1960s when private military activity usually meant mercenaries of the rather unsavoury kind involved in post-colonial or neo-colonial conflicts. One of the reasons for considering the option of a licensing regime is that it may be desirable to distinguish between reputable and disreputable private sector operators, to encourage and support the former while, as far as possible, eliminating the latter.

www.foxnews.com...

WASHINGTON — They have military-style weapons and duties. Many even have military-style body armour and crew cuts. An Iraqi could be forgiven for failing to understand that these men are guns for hire — not soldiers. Click link above

primetimecrime.com...

Click the link to see list of PMC’s in Iraq (and also some bad press) there are some good links here so please don’t just read the bad ones and give a bad opinion read them all please

Great post jayce

Yes many people do associate these contractors for mercenaries depicted in hollywood. People use the term "merc" too loosely. The difference is clearly as night and day.

Webster's definition

one that serves merely for wages; especially : a soldier hired into foreign service

Most people in the Military that are stationed overseas from thier country fit into this definition, I know I do. I got into my work for the money (may not be much:lol, Iam stationed overseas (as in not in the US).....so am I a "merc"? Most people who join the US military do so for money. Some just wanna do thier 2 or 4 years and get out and use the GI bill to pay for college, which is great....isnt that joining for money aswell?

And to add on to the many other services that "PMC's" offer, here's one more.

Many security consulting companies are also involved in hostage negotiations and rescue. In fact there are many companies that have this as thier sole purpose. Is this bad? They handle any and all aspects from negotiating to delivery and if the need arises, rescue.

Is it wrong to hire these type of companies when governments are not willing or can't help persons that have been kidnapped? This is large problem especially in South America where every year many American and European citizens are kipnapped and held for ransom by armed hostile militias and gangs.

cheers sportmb your post was also great, pointing out the little things that people over look!
Are the Iraqi's who are gaurding reconstruction efforts at schools and medical facilitys mercenaries also? they get paid by the company and are armed? if you ask them they only want to help with the re building of iraq! they are not supporters of "resistant moves" because they know when that stops so will the violence... these are the brave souls of iraq, coming to work for a western company everyday and aid in the reconstruction projects or protection of these projects and for this the "resistance/ insurgents/ terrorist" execute them with a single shot to the head or a few rounds from a AK47! tell me do you consider these people mercenaries also?

Originally posted by jayce
There are three major differences between these new corporate armies and mercenaries of old.

First: - They are business ventures foremost, not a venture for individual profit or excitement.

The corporation is made up of individuals in business for profit and excitement bud.

Originally posted by jayce
Second: - These corporations, at least those based in western states, do not take contracts that are in direct opposition to their country's national interest.

You mean only red, white and blue work. Depends on who your contract is with.

Originally posted by jayce
Third: - Again for those based in western countries, they maintain a high level of professionalism and profess to adhere to internationally accepted norms of operations.

If we all adhered to internationally accepted norms of operations - there would be no need for provocateurs and backstoppers.

You mean only red, white and blue work. Depends on who your contract is with.

good points with the other ones however have to disagree with this one, we have columbian, nepalise, iraq, south african, american, british, swedish, polish and the last norwegain! as you can see not all these are red white and blue...

good post though

Great post Jayce,

I am always fascinated by these companies. Ever read the Blackwater site? Its interesting to see the recruitment requirements. Quite stringent.

recommend reading the recruitment for OAM a austrailian security company over here will post the site add when i remember

Originally posted by skippytjc
Its interesting to see the recruitment requirements. Quite stringent.

Yeah they are. however due to supply and demand the requirements have relaxed a little, just a little though. Still only professionals are being hired.

A guy I work with starts up with Blackwater in a couple months. He is a professional in what he does as is all (very few exceptions) people in that line of work. There is more to it than just knowing how to shoot and being gung-ho. As you can see by the Blackwater Iraqi detail requirements:

•Must be willing and able to deploy overseas for at least 6 months

•Must be a U.S. Citizen, proof of citizenship required (copy of Blue Tourist Passport).

•Must be able to pass a general health physical.

•Must be able to obtain a Secret Clearance.

•Weight must be proportionate to height.

•Must be able to pass a physical fitness test.

•Must present and maintain a neat and clean appearance.

•No history of major illness or mental disorder.

•Experience must be verifiable, submit a DD-214 or other paperwork that can be
independently verified.

•Must have an Honorable Discharge.

•Must possess good written and verbal communications skills in English.

•No felony or violent crime convictions (NO WAIVERS).

•No personal bankruptcy or outstanding credit deliquency within seven years.

•No DUI or illegal drug use history within seven years.

•No spouse abuse or domestic violence conviction.