Private military force and challenges for the future

Abstract

The article calls for greater clarity and analytical rigour in the debate over the role of private military actors in international affairs. It argues that the blanket term ‘mercenary’ is inappropriate and subsumes different types of private operation under one emotive, negative heading. The article goes on to outline the structures of five different types of privatised entities; independent military companies, proxy companies, security companies, ad hoc groupings and privatised states. It assesses their roles in international security and their chances of success. The article contends that in certain cases the use of privatised military actors can be beneficial, but also calls for greater regulation and control based on a balanced evaluation of both potential advantages and dangers of this rapidly growing sector.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 48 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.