Search

In an era of globalization, states employ private military and security companies (PMSCs) to carry out various military functions. This signals an international shift in military strategy away from traditional state actors and towards the use of nonstate actors motivated by profit. The result has been an unequal application of international humanitarian law (IHL) towards PMSC personnel in international armed conflict. This Comment offers three suggestions on how to standardize the treatment of PMSC personnel in international armed conflict and ensure accountability and compliance with IHLs: (1) treat PMSCs engaged in international armed conflict as personnel of the state employing them, (2) outlaw PMSCs operating in international armed conflict, or (3) require PMSCs to apply for international licenses. Each option is examined through the lens of Blackwater operations in Iraq and Wagner operations in Ukraine, two of the most notorious PMSCs widely criticized in the media for their blatant disregard for IHL. These suggestions aim to strike a balance between an evolving military landscape, the profit-driven motivations of nonstate actors, and IHL considerations. Ultimately, this will create a more equitable and legally sound framework for addressing the role of PMSCs in contemporary armed conflicts, ensuring that they are held accountable for their actions and that IHL is upheld. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In an era of globalization, states employ private military and security companies (PMSCs) to carry out various military functions. This signals an international shift in military strategy away from traditional state actors and towards the use of nonstate actors motivated by profit. The result has been an unequal application of international humanitarian law (IHL) towards PMSC personnel in international armed conflict. This Comment offers three suggestions on how to standardize the treatment of PMSC personnel in international armed conflict and ensure accountability and compliance with IHLs: (1) treat PMSCs engaged in international armed conflict as personnel of the state employing them, (2) outlaw PMSCs operating in international armed conflict, or (3) require PMSCs to apply for international licenses. Each option is examined through the lens of Blackwater operations in Iraq and Wagner operations in Ukraine, two of the most notorious PMSCs widely criticized in the media for their blatant disregard for IHL. These suggestions aim to strike a balance between an evolving military landscape, the profit-driven motivations of nonstate actors, and IHL considerations. Ultimately, this will create a more equitable and legally sound framework for addressing the role of PMSCs in contemporary armed conflicts, ensuring that they are held accountable for their actions and that IHL is upheld. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]