Private military force and challenges for the future

Shearer, David R.

doi:10.1080/09557579908400275

Cited by 32 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…On the contrary, looking at the issue of PMCs through the single-case lens leads observers to ask technomanagerial questions. From this perspective, it might be right that PMCs should be seen as if they were 'weapon systems' at the disposal of policymakers (Shearer, 1998b: 90) whose task is finding the most 'cost effective solution' (Shearer, 2001: 30). Moreover, it is probably also true that, from this vantage point, whether private or public forces should be charged with a specific task is a 'technical question' (Brauer, 1998: 135).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 98%

The Market for Force and Public Security: The Destabilizing Consequences of Private Military Companies

Leander

2005

Journal of Peace Research

112

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article explains how it is possible to arrive at the paradoxical conclusion that an increased reliance on private actors (in the guise of private military companies) could consolidate public peace and security in the weakest African states. It argues that this conclusion can only be reached if the dynamics of the market for force are neglected. The basic claim is that the market as a whole has effects that cannot be captured by focussing on single cases. The article analyses these effects, departing from the empirical functioning of supply, demand and externalities in the market for force in order to spell out the implications for public security. More specifically, the article shows that supply in the market for force tends to self-perpetuate, as PMCs turn out a new caste of security experts striving to fashion security understandings to defend and conquer market shares. The process leads to an expansion of the numbers and kinds of threats the firms provide protection against. Moreover, demand does not penalize firms that service ‘illegitimate’ clients in general. Consequently, the number of actors who can wield control over the use force is limited mainly by their ability to pay. Finally, an externality of the market is to weaken existing security institutions by draining resources and worsening the security coverage. This gives further reasons to contest the legitimacy of existing security orders. In other words, the development of a market for force increases the availability and perceived need for military services, the number of actors who have access to them and the reasons to contest existing security orders. This hardly augurs well for public security.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 98%

The Market for Force and Public Security: The Destabilizing Consequences of Private Military Companies

Leander

2005

Journal of Peace Research

112

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A large number of insightful studies on the consequences of PMSCs' boom analyse how their use has impacts on the state's control over the use of force, on the nature and quality of security provision, as well as on the democratic accountability of governments concerning decisions to use force (Shearer 1999;Avant 2005;Krahmann 2008; Avant and Sigelman 2010;Deitelhoff 2010;Deitelhoff and Geis 2010). Others focus on problems and shortcomings in the national, international and transnational regulation of PMSCs (Krahmann 2005;Schneiker 2007;De Nevers 2009a, b;Leander 2010).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Theorising the use of private military and security companies: a synthetic perspective

Kruck¹

2013

J Int Relat Dev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article seeks to systematise and advance the theoretical debate on the causes and conditions for the privatisation of security. Drawing on previous research on private military and security companies (PMSCs) and theories from International Relations and Comparative Politics, it reconstructs functionalist, political-instrumentalist and ideationist explanations for why and under what conditions even 'strong' and democratic Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development states (extensively) use PMSCs. An analysis of inter-temporal and cross-national (United States, British, German and French) patterns of security privatisation indicates that all the three theoretical models point out causes and conditions that are relevant for a comprehensive explanation, but none is sufficient alone. Therefore, the article uses both the models and the empirical evidence to propose a synthetic perspective, which treats different explanatory conditions and logics as complementary, rather than rival. Going beyond the atheoretical conclusion that a multitude of disconnected factors are in some way relevant for a comprehensive explanation of security privatisation, I develop a thin and a thick synthesis that rely on a domain-of-application approach and sequencing, respectively. The thin synthesis spells out how different explanatory factors operate in specific domains, whereas the thick synthesis elaborates how different conditions and mechanisms apply to different phases of security privatisation and how they interrelate.

show abstract

“…The US-based PMC, Brown and Root Defence Systems, and the UKbased Defence Systems Limited, were, according to David Shearer considered serious contenders for a contract by the UK government, to co-ordinate and control British relief efforts in future conflict areas. 24 Such contracts are considered desirable for two main reasons. First, the very magnitude and complexity of contemporary relief operations provides a market niche which fits neatly within the logistical skills of PMCs.…”

Section: Mercenaries and Pmcsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Private Military Companies as ‘Epistemic Communities’

Jones¹

2006

Civil Wars

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Private military force and challenges for the future

Cited by 32 publications

References 1 publication

The Market for Force and Public Security: The Destabilizing Consequences of Private Military Companies

The Market for Force and Public Security: The Destabilizing Consequences of Private Military Companies

Theorising the use of private military and security companies: a synthetic perspective

Private Military Companies as ‘Epistemic Communities’

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About