![]() “Private Military and Security Companies: Industry-Led Self-Regulatory Initiatives versus State-Led Containment Strategy”. This paper will argue that Nationality States should regulate and licence their citizens who work for PMSCs, and enforce applicable IHL restrictions upon such civilians when they act in extra-territorial conflict zones. Hence, if a State’s civilians deliberately and regularly expose themselves to prohibited acts and munitions in foreign conflict zones, should they be required to observe some of the same restrictions that are placed on their national militaries? None of the current approaches to regulate PMSCs adequately addresses this issue. While these States ensure that their military personnel respect their ratified IHL treaties wherever they act, the same assurance cannot always be given for their civilians working as contractors in foreign conflicts. Many such ‘Nationality States’ have ratified multiple international humanitarian law (IHL) commitments, including disarmament treaties. A fourth category is made up of States that may not fall under any of the preceding three categories but whose citizens are employed by foreign PMSCs. Both approaches place responsibilities on the States that hire PMSCs, act as their home bases, and on whose territories the PMSCs facilitate military operations. The two main proposals for an oversight system include voluntary self-regulation versus a treaty that would bind States to regulate and control PMSC conduct. The global use of Private Military and Security Companies (PMSCs) has grown steadily in recent years but a universally acknowledged regulatory system to monitor their compliance with international laws remains elusive. The paper calls for new measures that continue to build on IHL and the Geneva Conventions, but that go beyond the current regulatory positions of existing international initiatives. This “battle of influence” over the regulation of the use of force, Saner contends, leads to rising tensions between stakeholders who form coalitions consisting of states, PMSCs, and civil society actors on either side of the regulation cleavage. ![]() This self-imposed quasi-regulatory space counters other international efforts – notably the Montreux Document and the International Code of Conduct – which seek to strengthen the resolve of states and PMSCs to uphold and respect international humanitarian law (IHL) and human rights. The Working Paper focuses on recent self-regulatory guidelines that have been created by private military and security companies (PMSCs) in order to deter calls for stricter regulations of the industry. The increasing privatization of security is a central feature of the way in which the control and oversight of armed force is currently being recalibrated – requiring no less than a comprehensive rethinking of the relationship between the state and the individual citizen.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |