Private Military Companies and World Order

This assignment delves into the complex world of private military companies (PMCs). Students are tasked with researching PMCs' increasing influence on global affairs, analyzing their effects on traditional notions of state power and sovereignty, and exploring the ethical dilemmas associated with their operations. The research requires a critical evaluation of scholarly literature, potentially incorporating qualitative methods like interviews or case studies to gain nuanced insights into this evolving landscape.

Running head: PRIVATISATION OF MILITARY FORCE: PROS AND CONS
Privatisation of Military Force: Pros and Cons
Student’s name:
The name of the university:
Author’s note:

1PRIVATISATION OF MILITARY FORCE: PROS AND CONS
Acknowledgement
I am extremely grateful to all the individuals who have been parts of my research study of
‘privatisation of military forces: pros and cons’. I am thankful to my friends and professor in
providing me with understanding about this topic within the discipline of International Relations.
I am also thankful to my family who granted me help whenever necessary. Moreover, I am
thankful to the librarians for providing me with help with articles, periodicals and books. I
obtained help from the digital library of my university also. Therefore, I want to share my
heartfelt gratitude after learning so many aspects of privatisation of security forces.
Thank you.

2PRIVATISATION OF MILITARY FORCE: PROS AND CONS
Abstract
This study sheds light on the privatisation of security forces highlighting the global aspects. In
the domain of security, the dramatic shift occurred when the military force was privatised.
Privatisation of security has been vested upon the private contractors who take the contracts of
security for a state. In some states, there are various needs of strong security because of internal
violence, external factors and warfare. After the end of the Cold War, the weak states took the
tactic of privatisation of security forces. In this study, there are five chapters. In the first chapter;
the problem that the research addresses has been identified with aim, objectives and questions of
the research stated. Then, in the literature review chapter, scholarly papers have been reviewed to
get clarify the issue of the privatisation of the security forces. It has been observed that private
security is a growing market and the US has been the pioneer in taking help of Private Security
Companies (PSCs). In some African countries, there are needs of privatisation as the leaders
make weak attempts to consolidate their roles and position. Some argue that the international
community can take the help of the private security forces.
In the third chapter of methodology, the data collection procedure has been stated. Positivism
philosophy, exploratory design and deductive approach have been taken in order to collect the
data. Moreover, secondary data collection process has been taken and data have been collected
through books, journals and websites. Thematic analysis has been taken in order to analyse the
gathered data. In the fourth chapter, five themes have been chosen with various aspects of
privatisation of security forces. Each of the themes justified the idea of pros and cons of security
forces. Benefits and consequences of security forces in states with political changes have been
explained with tables. In the fifth chapter, in recommendations and conclusions, the conclusion
has been drawn from the analysis and objectives have been linked with analysis. In addition,

3PRIVATISATION OF MILITARY FORCE: PROS AND CONS
recommendations like improved economic conditions that prevent negative external influences
and the information of strategic group acting between national force and private force have been
made for the states to consider.

4PRIVATISATION OF MILITARY FORCE: PROS AND CONS
Table of Contents
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION....................................................................................................8
1.1 Background of the study........................................................................................................8
1.2 Rationale of the study............................................................................................................9
1.3 Research Aim.......................................................................................................................11
1.4 Research Objectives.............................................................................................................11
1.5 Research Questions..............................................................................................................11
1.6 Significance of the research.................................................................................................12
1.7 Structure of the research......................................................................................................12
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW.......................................................................................13
2.1 Introduction..........................................................................................................................13
2.2 Concept of privatisation of security forces..........................................................................13
2.3 Privatisation effect on State control of Force......................................................................14
2.4 Support for privatisation of security sources.......................................................................15
2.5 Disadvantages of privatisation of security forces................................................................15
2.6 Privatisation of security forces and political changes..........................................................16
2.6 Literature gap.......................................................................................................................17
2.7 Summary..............................................................................................................................17
CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY...........................................................................18

5PRIVATISATION OF MILITARY FORCE: PROS AND CONS
3.1 Introduction..........................................................................................................................18
3.2 Research Onion....................................................................................................................18
3.3 Research philosophy............................................................................................................18
3.4 Research design...................................................................................................................19
3.5 Research approach...............................................................................................................19
3.6 Data collection method........................................................................................................19
3.7 Data analysis........................................................................................................................20
3.8 Accessibility issues..............................................................................................................20
3.9 Research ethics....................................................................................................................20
3.10 Research timeline...............................................................................................................21
3.11 Summary............................................................................................................................21
CHAPTER 4: DATA FINDINGS AND DATA ANALYSIS.......................................................22
4.1 Introduction..........................................................................................................................22
4.2 Thematic analysis................................................................................................................22
Table 1: Geographic split of private military forces..............................................................24
Table 2: Contracted security services in global aspect..........................................................25
Table 3: Private security force spending (percent of GDP)...................................................26
4.3 Summary..............................................................................................................................27
CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS.................................................28
5.1 Conclusions..........................................................................................................................28

6PRIVATISATION OF MILITARY FORCE: PROS AND CONS
5.2 Linking with objectives.......................................................................................................28
5.3 Recommendations................................................................................................................29
5.4 Limitations of the study.......................................................................................................30
5.5 Future scope of the study.....................................................................................................31
Reference List............................................................................................................................32
Appendix........................................................................................................................................36
Table: Gantt chart..................................................................................................................36

7PRIVATISATION OF MILITARY FORCE: PROS AND CONS
List of Tables
Table 1: Geographic split of private military forces......................................................................24
Table 2: Contracted security services in global aspect..................................................................25
Table 3: Private security force spending (percent of GDP)...........................................................26
Table: Gantt chart..........................................................................................................................37

8PRIVATISATION OF MILITARY FORCE: PROS AND CONS
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
In the International Relations system, states have a monopoly on the legitimate use of
power and armed forces and the state has the only power of internal security. Moreover, the state
has the provision to protect the people from external threats. In this paper, the aim, objectives
and questions will be set on the question of privatisation of security forces and its benefits and
consequences. In the literature review section, the scholarly papers will be reviewed. In the
methodology section, the secondary data will be collected in order to analyse the research
objectives. Conclusion and recommendations will be given based on research findings.
1.1 Background of the study
The concept of public security is being corrupted in many affairs as the security functions
are getting privatised. The main reason for this emerging trend is happening because states
cannot ensure the security within the societies and borders. Most of the affected states are war-
torn and it is seen that private security groups are more active in the weak states. As stated by
Pattison (2014), around the globe, conflicts and malign factors among the countries have been
causing a collapse of security structures. In most of the developing countries, global economy,
policies and financial condition of the states have often been causing the political instability and
public stability. Most of the wars are happening for internal conflict and opposition between two
countries. Instead of fighting two national forces, the warfare is happening between national
forces and irregular forces. As pointed out by Fredland and Kendry (2013), in some countries,
limited availability of arms has been seen, however, war entrepreneurs are prevalent. This factor
causes the chronic militarisation of society in such countries like Liberia, Somalia and Columbia.

9PRIVATISATION OF MILITARY FORCE: PROS AND CONS
Privatisation of security in some trouble inflicted countries has mainly happened because
of profit through formal contracts. The security is appointed to the private firms as it is more
financially efficient, and is consequently a mode where there is better access to armies and
convenient execution (Howe 2014). There are debates, however, with reference to whether the
undertakings that are performed by the private areas are naturally the elements of the legislature
and ought to accordingly not be given over to an outsider at any level. The powers which are
given by the security organisations are likewise factored; there are volunteers or hired soldiers
who can battle either for ideological esteems or only for cash, and there are private military
organisations who work exclusively for the legislature.
1.2 Rationale of the study
What is the issue?
The idea of ‘private security group’ encompasses military, private security and mercenary
groups. The concept of United States military is increasingly extended to the other states as
recruiting private firms for national security purposes is emerging. The advantages are obvious
for the most part in terms of cost and adaptability alongside improved security of the states.
Contentions have been raised with respect to whether the privatisation will for sure be less
expensive or not make national force a disintegrating responsibility worldwide (Mandel 2012).
Why is it an issue?
The privatisation of security is perhaps the most dramatic incursion of the private sector.
The data that is accessible to the legislature ends up being limited; so does its impact on
government strategies or choices (Leander 2013). Indeed, because of the constrained data,
governments are not even in the position to know about the preparations made for security and

10PRIVATISATION OF MILITARY FORCE: PROS AND CONS
therefore, they control these arrangements. When a state allows the privatisation of national
force, private contractors undertake a range of work activities like logistics, security services and
training to the armies. Soldiers are trained by contract officers and they are supplied with
ammunition, food and equipment
Why is it an issue now?
The benefits to policy flexibility, costs and greater military agility flow on states when
security is privatised. The privatisation can minimise the causalities of nationals and it can save
more financial resources. Privatisation can reduce transparency and accountability. It can also
encourage copycat actions. For instance, the Iraq war has been the path breaker in the history of
warfare as it was the first modern public-private war. US’s invasion of Iraq in the year 2003
entailed the use of 140,000 US soldiers and more than 21,000 contract troops (Kinsey 2016). As
commented by Lea (2016), war is now a hybrid affair. It is being done by the public-private mix.
As noted above, the private contractors give support in training of the armies, give logistic
support and provide site security. The states are not the only organisation that provides financial
security, however, NGOs and multinational corporations are providing support with financial
resources to the states, for instance, British Petroleum hired Defence System Limited to protect
their pipeline in Columbia. Besides the aforementioned lack of accountability, the problem is
that secure information can be leaked in the hands of contractors.
In recent time, there are three types of private forces working for the nation,
mercenary/volunteer forces, private military companies and private security companies.
Governments do not usually hire the private military forces; however, they often have links with
private forces. The primary reasons for such a case are that the countries need to gain military

11PRIVATISATION OF MILITARY FORCE: PROS AND CONS
security where they are lacking professionalism and they might have potentially disloyal forces.
For instances, Papua New Guinea signed a contract with Sandline International in order to end
the eight-year war in a secessionist province, Bougainville (Howe 2014). Sometimes, the nation
in conflict might have legitimate reasons for hiring the private forces.
1.3 Research Aim
The aim of the research is to explore the advantages and disadvantages of privatisation of
military forces in countries.
1.4 Research Objectives
Research objectives are as follows:
 To explore the reasons behind the privatisation of military forces with practical examples
from the past
 To highlight the advantages of privatisation of security forces the countries can gain
 To point out the issues that a country might face in privatisation of military forces
 To bring out the relationship between privatisation of military forces and political
changes
1.5 Research Questions
Research questions are as follows:
 What are the reasons behind the privatisation of military forces in some countries?
 What are the advantages of privatisation of security forces?
 What could be the possible issues that a country faces in the privatisation of military
forces?
 What is the relationship between privatisation of military forces and political changes?

12PRIVATISATION OF MILITARY FORCE: PROS AND CONS
1.6 Significance of the research
This research paper will shed light on the privatisation of security forces and its
advantages and disadvantages. With the advancement of time, the axiom set by Western states is
being challenged as globalisation and other external factors are influencing in the privatisation of
security forces. This paper will be helpful for the future researchers who may conduct the
research on the same topic or related topics. Moreover, the diplomats or persons from state
affairs can get help in understanding the pros and cons of privatisation of security forces. In
addition, readers of the research paper will get benefits to understand the subject of the
privatisation of military forces and political changes.
1.7 Structure of the research
Figure 1: Structure of the research
(Source: Self-developed)

13PRIVATISATION OF MILITARY FORCE: PROS AND CONS
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Introduction
In this chapter, scholarly articles and papers will be reviewed providing instances from
these. In International Relations, legitimate use of national security forces is important, however,
in burgeoning transnational market, the security forces are getting privatised in countries. There
are both advantages and disadvantages in privatising the security forces as it can pose tradeoffs
to control violence. The national security forces are shifting from governments to civil society
and this change is opening up the institutional innovations or intercultural changes in
international relations. In this chapter, the concept of privatisation of security forces will be
discussed with pros and cons of the concept. Moreover, a gap of literature will be explained
identifying the concept mismatches of the authors.
2.2 Concept of privatisation of security forces
Military privatisation has existed since long ago and it is growing to be an important
component in a national security capacity. In national security there is a growing need for
outsourced services. These include, enhancing the administrative efficiency. States that fail in
maintaining national forces can be seen in are some post-colonial countries that are going
through reconstruction of their situation and sub-state security aims. As supported by Petersohn
(2017), private contractors in national security are here to stay in the market as they provide help
in national security in logistics, security services and coaching to the national forces. These
private contracts are experienced and they are readily available in any kind of dramatic situation.
In case of states wanting to engage in combat operations or need stabilisation operations, private
security forces take the proper role in drawing a distinction between the two. In the

14PRIVATISATION OF MILITARY FORCE: PROS AND CONS
reconstruction of the national forces in many of the developing countries, these private
contractors play a vital role. These private contractors can be from both profit and non-profit
agents and there is no known optimal mixture of private actors and national military forces in
stabilisation operation. In order to create synergy in the privatisation of military forces,
collaboration between private and public should be brought into the light. As stated by Schaub
and Kelty (2016), multi-sectoral collaboration is needed in the privatisation of security forces as
it is a challenging concept and relationship between individual and states.
2.3 Privatisation effect on State control of Force
Global security forces have speculation about consequences of privatisation of security
and privatisation of security may deliver the services in a cheap and flexible way. Privatisation of
security forces for a state can yield enhancement of security forces as the private contractors are
more professional. On the contrary, some argued that privatisation will make the security forces
costly and it can make the states affair public, it can erode the accountability and it can also pose
challenges in global governance (Satchowitsch 2013). For instance, in the year 1994, US wanted
to create a balance of power in Balkans area and they sent a Private Security Companies (PSC)
without sending US troops. The US also made a contract with a PSC in providing the training to
military. This training provided success to the military forces and US government mentioned it
as ‘surge strength’. As supported by Vrdoljak (2016), private security forces are deployed onto
the site with personal security for the people working in the country. Privatisation can affect the
cost of security control as the national forces of a country can be high budget sector.
In the US, the cost of keeping an instructor for more $10,000 per year along with the
outsourcing of the military forces can support the cost saving as only one contract with private
forces can provide logistics support, flexibility, personnel support and training facility (Walters

15PRIVATISATION OF MILITARY FORCE: PROS AND CONS
and D’Aoust 2015). In national forces, centralised power takes the decisions and they try to
influence policy. In case of privatisation, government cannot give any decisions to the private
forces, like training, expert personnel and media coverage.
2.4 Support for privatisation of security sources
Privatisation of security forces provides advantages of policy flexibility for a country as
without the bureaucratic and political lead time for taking a decision, the private force can
mobilise the forces (Herbst 2016). In this scenario, the responsibility is completely vested upon
the private security forces and they do not wait for government in issuing the decision, they
move the forces. Deployment of forces and repatriation can be done efficiently. In addition, these
types of contractors recruit from the database of ex-military personnel or police forces. These
people are already trained and experienced in this field and these make the team agile (Ero
2010). Moreover, privatisation of security forces provides the benefits of cost saving as it is
much harder to recruit large numbers amount of soldiers under the government. Private
contractors take the benefits of this and they return the order to from the disorder of civil war.
Private contractors minimise the casualties in security forces as they recruit the best persons with
skills and expertise (Dunigan and Petersohn 2015). The private contractors take the personal
database of their armies and they have agents in areas of the hotspot. These contractors are also
making the activities transparent.
2.5 Disadvantages of privatisation of security forces
According to Krahmann (2013), private security forces are the future of the war and
private security forces are better than infantry soldiers. The experience of Iraq war showed to the
world such factors as the age, size and nationality of the security forces. However, in case of the
reliability issue, private security forces can pose the risk of leaking of secret information.

16PRIVATISATION OF MILITARY FORCE: PROS AND CONS
Sometimes, the private security forces are recruiting the employees from Iraqis and they are
given performance over the security companies in Africa. These companies keep the contingency
plan with a large database with contract; however, these might get risky as some people may leak
the information (Small 2016). Risks of the private security can be related to the practical and
political. Surge capacity of security may come with a high price and it can determine the
comparative cost. Comparative cost is high in some circumstances as, without the flexibility, the
PSCs can increase the cost. Particular outcomes of the security forces may not match with the
typical chain of command of the security forces (Kitchen and Rygiel 2014). There is lack of law
associated with private security forces as it was suggested that in Balkans operations that had
been sex trafficking by private forces.
2.6 Privatisation of security forces and political changes
According to Heinecken (2014), the beginning of the privatisation is not clear, as some
mentioned it as the result of warlord politics, new wars of the 1990s and non-territorial network
war. In these scenarios, the private security markets are aggravated in many of the conflicts. On
the other side, many of the countries praised the private security forces in the deployment of the
security services in the Middle East and Balkans provinces to provide stability. As opined by
Bryden (2016), private security forces are used as the safeguard of the inability of a country’s
national forces and politics. In addition, no government or any non-profit organisation can ever
deny the ability of conflict-resolution of private security forces. Moreover, in a community, the
private security forces can increase or undermine the integration of values with violence in
reference to the human rights, the rule of laws and democratic principles. Politics in each state
can change the mechanism and they can redistribute the power that enhances and affect the
control of violence. According to Cilliers and Mason (2013), private involvement is prevalent in

17PRIVATISATION OF MILITARY FORCE: PROS AND CONS
delivering and financing the security of a country. Some ‘non-state actors’ are trying to make a
fund for the private security forces for their near future profitability.
2.6 Literature gap
The above cited literature on this subject focused on the privatisation of security forces
and its emerging market. Some of the authors drew attention the advantages that a country can
get from the private security companies. Moreover, examples of private security in warfare are
limited. Most of the information comes from the US military forces as they hired private security
forces in the recent past. There would be risks in contracting the integrated responses from public
and private forces. It has been observed that there is lack of legal clarity in security personnel
recruiting. The literature does not provide the clear picture of the cons of privatisation of security
forces and nation's threats upon this.
2.7 Summary
In the literature review section, the scholarly articles have been reviewed and possible
aspects of the privatisation of security forces explained. However, the history of the privatisation
of security forces is not coherent or complete. Moreover, this secondary data will influence in the
thematic analysis section as this study will be based on secondary data. This information will
impact on the conclusion that will be drawn in chapter five.

18PRIVATISATION OF MILITARY FORCE: PROS AND CONS
CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
3.1 Introduction
In this chapter, the process of data collection and data analysis will be discussed. The
methodology is the theoretical application of a systematic process that encompasses the ideas of
data collection and analysis. Research methodology helps in research to collect the data in the
correct way to find a solution of an issue. However, essentially, the methods of research help in
describing, predicting and explaining the research phenomena. Research methodology is a set of
process to collect the data in an ethical way that assists to analyse the data.
3.2 Research Onion
Research onion is the layered approach to conduct the research and collect the data. As
stated by Saunders et al. (2011), research onion gives an effective idea through which research
process can be designed. In the research onion, there are three main types of layers,
epistemology, ontology and axiology. Research onion adapts almost any types of research
methodology and it can be used in variety of contexts.
3.3 Research philosophy
Research philosophy is a general belief through which data is collected, analysed and
used. Moreover, research philosophy is the process of gathering data about a phenomenon that
can encompass in various scientific and social aspects (Mackey and Gass 2015). There are three
types of research philosophies, positivism, realism and interpretivism.

19PRIVATISATION OF MILITARY FORCE: PROS AND CONS
In this research, the researcher has taken Positivist Philosophy as this philosophy helps to
use the existing concept to develop the research process. As this study is based on secondary
data, positivism has assisted in testing the theories and concepts told in literature.
3.4 Research design
Research design means the overall strategy that a researcher can choose to integrate the
various elements of study in the logical and coherent way (Taylor et al. 2015). There are three
main types of research design, exploratory, explanatory and descriptive.
In this study, the researcher has selected exploratory research design. The objective of
exploratory research design is to discover the ideas and insights of the selected topic. Moreover,
the characteristics of exploratory research are the flexible and versatile approach. In analysing
the secondary data, exploratory research helps in front end descriptive analysis.
3.5 Research approach
The research approach is the overall process of research that helps to delve deep into the
research topic through the pattern of collected data (Silverman 2016). There are mainly two
types of research approach, inductive approach and deductive approach.
In this study, the researcher has selected deductive approach as there is already a huge
amount of data presented on this topic. This existing information provides help to the researcher
in acquiring the correct information. Deductive approach is the process of verification of the data
and it is a quick process. In case of privatisation of security forces, the general information has
been gathered from secondary forces and this has achieved the research objectives.

20PRIVATISATION OF MILITARY FORCE: PROS AND CONS
3.6 Data collection method
There are mainly two types of data collection procedure, one is primary and other is
secondary data collection. In primary data collection procedure, raw data is collected from
respondents. In this study, the researcher has collected secondary data from various secondary
sources like journals, websites, government reports, case studies books and articles. Secondary
data provides the benefits of easy access can be obtained quickly and is inexpensive.
3.7 Data analysis
Secondary analysis is related to the use of existing data that have been gathered for the
purpose of this study. In this study, the researcher has followed the thematic analysis technique.
Thematic analysis is a common style of qualitative analysis that deals with the themes and
subjects of the study. As opined by Flick (2015), thematic analysis helps to emphasise
examining, pinpointing and recording the themes within the data. Themes are the phenomena
that are associated with the research objectives and these are the patterns of the data sets to
describe the research topics.
3.8 Accessibility issues
All the data have been collected from the relevant sources. In this study, secondary data
have been collected and these are collected from the credible sources. All the books, journals and
pdf articles have been collected as premium versions. Moreover, the researcher has faced the
issue of accessibility in acquiring some ‘paid versions' of journals and government reports. The
researcher has taken help of librarian in accessing some important books and sources.

21PRIVATISATION OF MILITARY FORCE: PROS AND CONS
3.9 Research ethics
In this research, the researcher has followed all the ethical norms. At first, the researcher
has taken permission to conduct the research via agreement by the supervisor on the chosen topic
and this research is based on secondary sources, not on respondents of primary sources of human
subjects. In secondary data analysis, the researcher has taken help only from credible sources and
these ensure re-identification of the sources and information. Secondary data vary in terms of an
amount of data that have been collected. In secondary data analysis, the values of the information
have been judged by the researcher with other sources. Premium and reputed journals and
articles have been used by the researcher.
3.10 Research timeline
(Refer to Appendix)
3.11 Summary
In this chapter, the data collection process has been identified and data analysis technique
has been justified. In this research, secondary data have been collected and all the ethics have
been followed by the researcher. In the following chapter, thematic analysis is conducted in order
to analyse the findings of the privatisation of security forces and its impact on states.

22PRIVATISATION OF MILITARY FORCE: PROS AND CONS
CHAPTER 4: DATA FINDINGS AND DATA ANALYSIS
4.1 Introduction
In this chapter, data findings and analysis are conducted. Data have been collected from
various secondary sources and analysed through thematic analysis. All the data have been
segregated into five separate themes. In each theme, a specific topic has been discussed with
facts and tables. The findings in this chapter demonstrate the threats and advantages of
privatisation of security forces for a country.
4.2 Thematic analysis
Theme 1: Private security industry and state
Private security companies provide expertise and security services to a public and private
domain. These services can be explained as the protection of assets and personnel. This industry
is rapidly growing and there are 2 million security workers in the US, the government of US is
expected to raise this with 20% growth by 2020 (Eckert 2016). The security industry has been
helping states as well and privatisation of security forces put the threat to the national security
system. Among the countries that have these directions, maybe South Africa and the United
States are the ones with the most exceptional authoritative layouts; however, these measures are
not enough. PMC industry is growing and it is estimating about $20 billion in range and this has
led to the service of force deployment in a conflict situation. In case of policymakers in the state,
they cannot judge the rising menace of different non-state security threats. In the previous
occasion, this force had a civilian contract, however, post-2001, the states have been facing the
counter-insurgency operation. As stated by Eicher (2014), for the last three hundred years, the
state had the legitimate monopoly in security forces and they have been the only security actors,

23PRIVATISATION OF MILITARY FORCE: PROS AND CONS
however, the emergence of the PMCs, they can eradicate the sovereign power of states’ realm.
Private security forces challenge the ideas of Weberian state and Tillian State. By this is meant
the system of administrative law must be there in a state and symbol of collective action should
be ensued. Therefore PMC displace the shield of state's sovereignty. This concept erodes the
financial base that controls the state security and the states' economic investments are now going
to the private sector. As mentioned by Erbel and Kinsey (2016), states' decision-making process
is being privatised and it can make a civil-military institutional balance. In addition, the
commodification and privatisation of violence can lead to the private security market that is
beyond the direct control of states.
Theme 2: Reincarnation of security forces through privatisation
Private military services companies are the modern days’ reincarnation of the security
services providers, like privateers, mercenaries and corsairs. States order the private groups to
work under the blurred situations as it is difficult to identify the actual happening. In this respect,
security companies move with large weapons and with large quantities of military equipment.
During the French Revolution, there were private soldiers who worked to protect Louis XVI in
Versailles. Similarly, the mercenaries in Iraq also tried to protect President Kharzai of
Afghanistan. Moreover, UN provides the message to the member states that they should prohibit
the training, recruiting and sending of armies abroad to use for operations (McFate 2017). Some
of the states and diplomats argue that private military forces can be used for the functioning of
international organisations. Private security forces can help in peacekeeping in an effective
manner. UN can use these forces for stabilisation of the unrest in some of the countries.
Africa Asia Australasia Europe North and Latin

24PRIVATISATION OF MILITARY FORCE: PROS AND CONS
America
7.3% 15.2% 4.2% 39.2% 31.5%
Table 1: Geographic split of private military forces
(Source: Bryden 2016)
In Operation Iraqi Freedom, more than 20,000 private security employees were deployed
by UN in Iraq as some viewed private security as the alternative mechanism. Some of the states
can hire private PSC without taking help of the UN in order to accomplish their needs and goals
(Godfrey et al. 2014). However, this factor can raise difficulties politically when seeking to stop.
The violence in some of the states. In spite of the fact that the states are obliged under
worldwide law to have strategies with respect to the operations of these security and military
gatherings, they have restricted control over them once they are outside of national borders.
Theme 3: Aspects of security forces and political changes
Privatisation of security forces may lead to the situation where public security can face
opposition from the private security. Therefore, the political forces and states need to create a
balance between public-private actors. As argued by Cusumano and Kinsey (2015), military and
security forces can abdicate the national security and they can join the private security in favour
of the profit motives. The states and political changes are at stake as national security
information can be privatised as well. PMCs can break the terms upon the rights of sovereign
states and political power. As stated by Abrahamsen and Leander (2015), there is an irony that
states use the private military to restore their power and sovereignty. Political changes are
providing the expanded capacity to the private security forces. Privatisation of security forces
can increase the market mechanism that can control a wide variety of politics. PCS in some

25PRIVATISATION OF MILITARY FORCE: PROS AND CONS
instances overlook the state’s regulatory structures. Many post-colonial states made poor state-
building policy and they could not provide public security for the protection of the population.
Therefore, the reconfiguration of security and emergence of new security structure forces some
countries to have privatised security forces. That private companies have been providing the
security forces to the nation, is neither unique nor new; however, the difference now is that the
number of contractors is increasing day-by-day.
Contracted security forces International services
Facility guarding 19%
Physical security services 21%
Security advising 23%
Security training 27%
Risk and threat analysis 16%
Table 2: Contracted security services in global aspect
(Source: Herbst 2016)
The rise of the privatisation of security can provide a fresh opportunity to reconfigure the
services of the states. Some politicians such as Herbst argue that private security forces can erode
of the states' political power. On the other side, Abrahamsen and Leander (2015), stated that
privatisation of security forces can extend the political power.
Theme 4: States’ benefits from privatisation of security forces
In today's world concept, a Weberian idea of state cannot be fulfilled and states' power is
eroding. The state's retreat is important in the security realm and in case security and military
become de-centralised, it can change the overall process of juridical, empirical and social fabric.

26PRIVATISATION OF MILITARY FORCE: PROS AND CONS
In this scenario, PSCs are going to become the security actors of the states. States can get extra
benefits from these PSCs; the first benefit is cost-effective (Dunigan and Petersohn 2015). In
keeping a national force, it is highly expensive. On the contrary, giving contracts to the private
security force can lessen the cost. In some of the African countries, it would be easier to have
private security forces like Somalia and Nigeria. Moreover, the policy flexibility is another
advantage that a state can have from privatisation as the government does not need to make
policies on military.
Country 1995 (%) 2000 (%) 2005 (%) 2010 (%)
USA 5.3 3.1 4.1 4
UK 3.9 2.4 2.7 2.3
Germany 2.8 1.5 1.3 1.4
African countries 2.5 1.08 1.05 1.2
Table 3: Private security force spending (percent of GDP)
(Source: Eir.info 2017)
Therefore, the deployment of armies gets easier. In providing training and coaching,
PSCs provide an advantage to the national security forces. These corporations also provide
assistance in logistics services of weapons (Satchowitsch 2013). Moreover, these PSCs recruit
special officers who have previous experiences in police forces and military forces, in this
regard; the agility of the military forces is enhanced. Experts and experienced people make the
PSCs agile and they can accommodate a wide variety of tasks.
Theme 5: Consequences of privatisation of security forces

27PRIVATISATION OF MILITARY FORCE: PROS AND CONS
Private security forces have made a market of their own and in order to control violence,
different routes of actions should be taken. In some of the cases, non-delivery of national
security has a link with a failure of the security forces. Power can be based on the military
strengths of a nation and economic competitiveness is another factor (Leander 2013). States can
enforce the private security forces in order to increase the strength of the national force.
Consequences of privatisation can be both positive and negative. Political changes are prevalent
in most of the countries and private forces need to mix up with each party. Moreover, when
private forces enter the sphere of governance, the transparency of the security forces will no
longer be seen. Accountability and confidence government will be missing. The government has
to discuss with private forces before giving any decision. States will encourage the copycat
actions, it could be criminal act that is modeled or inspired by a previous crime that has been
occurred previously in the private forces and cost may overrun (Pattinson 2014). As the
government's role in security will decrease political intervention may also decrease in security
forces.
4.3 Summary
Privatisation of security can enhance the significance of market mechanisms that can
control the violence and it can also be used in a different direction as well. Moreover, different
themes in this chapter have brought different aspects of privatisation of military forces. Not only
the states but also various international organisations can take the help of private security forces.
Private security forces can change the practices of sovereignty and these findings and analysis
will be helpful in drawing the conclusions.

28PRIVATISATION OF MILITARY FORCE: PROS AND CONS
CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 Conclusions
It has been observed that the dissemination of the control on violence has likewise
achieved difficulties, both on the international and states. Privatisation of military forces is still
not welcomed by some states while other states think that they can embrace such forces in
implementing their foreign policy. Private forces have been used in stopping the violence and in
some cases, in others they are war monger. The Private security forces are a customary element
if there should be an occurrence of political insecurity. At the point when there is a security hole,
the endeavours by the government alone can't generally fill the void. In such cases, outside help
with the type of privatized military help turns into a need. These organisations can in some cases
be additionally observed as intermediaries for the outside strategies of the provider country, as
the administrations substitute the military with the private temporary workers for the
advancement of their technological approaches in various ways. The useful range of these
security firms experiences change with time. There should be clarity about what PDCs do so that
governments can make the right choices. This appropriate for UN arrangements, as well as at the
national levels.
5.2 Linking with objectives
 To explore the reasons behind the privatisation of military forces with practical
examples from the past
This objective has been met in the literature review section. There are various reasons behind the
privatisation of security forces as cost-effectiveness, invasion of another place and stopping of
violence. An example of US, most notably in Iraq has been given as they took the help of private

29PRIVATISATION OF MILITARY FORCE: PROS AND CONS
military forces in order to outsource the private forces and it made a relationship between public-
private partnerships.
 To highlight the advantages of privatisation of security forces the countries can gain
This objective has been met in both literature review and in the thematic analysis section. The
benefits of privatisation for a state can be various, policy flexibility for a state and it can
minimise the causalities in warfare. Therefore, privatisation of security forces can increase the
military agility and government can gain financial savings as well.
 To point out the issues that a country might face in privatisation of military forces
This objective has been met in both literature review and in the thematic analysis section. Issues
and consequences of privatisation of military forces are cost overrun of the warfare. Moreover,
the government of a state can lose the actions of military. Moreover, confidentiality issues are
there where the private forces can reduce transparency.
 To bring out the relationship between privatisation of military forces and political
changes
This objective has been met in the literature review section as there is a strong relationship
between privatisation of military forces when there are political changes. Political affairs are
related to the privatisation of forces as the states are no longer following Weberian state concept.
The states need the help of security forces and these forces can be adopted by international
agencies.
5.3 Recommendations
The strategic group between national force and private services corporations

30PRIVATISATION OF MILITARY FORCE: PROS AND CONS
In some developing countries of Africa and developed countries, the states can allow the
private security forces to help the national security forces. An ally of both forces can make the
security forces stronger. The strategic alliance of both can tolerate the internal security and
violence within the states. The PSCs provide training and logistics supply for the country and
state can take advantage of this. Governments need to amend some foreign policies and
extension of security forces will provide benefits.
Manage economic condition
In some countries in Africa, the economic condition of the states is not good and they are
trying to save the states from internal violence. The government has its role to solve the issue of
the states by enforcing the private security forces. National security is expensive and it can
produce corruption also. Private security is agile and they can help the states in all conditions.
The Economic policy leaves decisions to the private market and private security forces save cost
for a state.
Prevent externalities
States sometimes face external issues from global political conditions. Externalities are
direct and indirect benefits and issues produced by the global factors which can impact the
society. Like the previous occasion, making a contract with PSCs can help the states. PSCs
recruit the experts and they can help in mitigating the warfare and violence. Keeping the
activities of PSCs on the track can help the state as well.
5.4 Limitations of the study
In conducting the study, the researcher has faced the issue of time constraint as the
research topic is vast and the researcher had to study a lot of books, journals and articles. It is a

31PRIVATISATION OF MILITARY FORCE: PROS AND CONS
secondary research, the researcher faced issues in downloading premium version of the articles
as the researcher did not have enough budget. In collecting the data, the statistics varied in some
occurrences and researcher faced limitation in acquiring right statistics. Sometimes, researcher
faced an issue when the documents lacked the authenticity.
5.5 Future scope of the study
This subject has enough scope for further study. This topic has investigated the
privatisation of security forces and its pros and cons. It would be interesting to conduct another
research within the same area of the subject with the incorporation of this study. With the help of
this study, one could conduct research on the ‘privatisation of military forces and its impact on
political changes’ and ‘the influence of privatisation of security forces on global governance’
could be another subject to further study.

32PRIVATISATION OF MILITARY FORCE: PROS AND CONS
Reference List
Abrahamsen, R. and Leander, A. eds., 2015. Routledge handbook of private security studies.
Abingdon: Routledge.
Bryden, A., 2016. Approaching the privatisation of security from a security governance
perspective. Private actors and security governance, pp.3-19.
Cilliers, J. and Mason, P. eds., 2013. Peace, profit or plunder?: The privatisation of security in
war-torn African societies. Institute for Security Studies.
Cusumano, E. and Kinsey, C., 2015. Bureaucratic interests and the outsourcing of security: The
privatization of diplomatic protection in the United States and the United Kingdom. Armed
Forces & Society, 41(4), pp.591-615.
Dunigan, M. and Petersohn, U. eds., 2015. The markets for force: privatization of security across
world regions. University of Pennsylvania Press.
Eckert, A.E., 2016. Outsourcing War: The Just War Tradition in the Age of Military
Privatization. Cornell University Press.
Eichler, M., 2014. Citizenship and the contracting out of military work: From national
conscription to globalized recruitment. Citizenship Studies, 18(6-7), pp.600-614.
Eir.info (2017). Available at: http://www.eir.info/2014/06/25/review-mercenaries-the-history-of-
a-norm-in-international-relations/ [Accessed on 27 Oct. 2017].
Erbel, M. and Kinsey, C., 2016. Privatizing military logistics. Routledge handbook of private
security studies, 4(3), pp.70-78.

33PRIVATISATION OF MILITARY FORCE: PROS AND CONS
Ero, C., 2010. Vigilantes, civil defence forces and militia groups. The other side of the
privatisation of security in Africa. Conflict trends, 20(1), pp.25-29.
Flick, U., 2015. Introducing research methodology: A beginner's guide to doing a research
project. London: Sage.
Fredland, E. and Kendry, A., 2013. The privatisation of military force: economic virtues, vices
and government responsibility. Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 13(1), pp.147-164.
Godfrey, R., Brewis, J., Grady, J. and Grocott, C., 2014. The private military industry and
neoliberal imperialism: Mapping the terrain. The organization, 21(1), pp.106-125.
Heinecken, L., 2014. Outsourcing public security: The unforeseen consequences for the military
profession. Armed Forces & Society, 40(4), pp.625-646.
Herbst, J., 2016. The regulation of private security forces. The Privatisation of Security in Africa,
South Africa, South African Institute of International Affairs, p.115.
Howe, H.M., 2014. Ambiguous order: military forces in African states. London: Lynne Rienner
Publishers.
Kinsey, C., 2016. Turning war into business: Private security companies and commercial
opportunism. The Ashgate research companion to modern warfare, 3(2), p.183.
Kitchen, V. and Rygiel, K., 2014. Privatizing security, securitizing policing: the case of the G20
in Toronto, Canada. International political sociology, 8(2), pp.201-217.
Krahmann, E., 2013. States, citizens and the privatisation of security. Cambridge University
Press.

34PRIVATISATION OF MILITARY FORCE: PROS AND CONS
Kruck, A., 2014. Theorising the use of private military and security companies: a synthetic
perspective. Journal of International Relations and Development, 17(1), pp.112-141.
Lea, J., 2016. War, criminal justice and the rebirth of privatisation. In The Palgrave Handbook of
Criminology and War (pp. 25-44). London: Palgrave Macmillan UK.
Leander, A. ed., 2013. Commercialising security in Europe: political consequences for peace
operations. Abingdon: Routledge.
Mackey, A. and Gass, S.M., 2015. Second language research: Methodology and design.
Abingdon: Routledge.
Mandel, R., 2012. The privatization of security. Armed Forces & Society, 28(1), pp.129-151.
McFate, S., 2017. The modern mercenary: Private armies and what they mean for world order.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Pattison, J., 2014. Deeper objections to the privatisation of military force. Journal of Political
Philosophy, 18(4), pp.425-447.
Petersohn, U., 2017. Private military and security companies (PMSCs), military effectiveness,
and conflict severity in weak states, 1990–2007. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 61(5), pp.1046-
1072.
Schaub Jr, G. and Kelty, R. eds., 2016. Private Military and Security Contractors: Controlling
the Corporate Warrior. London: Rowman & Littlefield.
Silverman, D. ed., 2016. Qualitative research. London: Sage.

35PRIVATISATION OF MILITARY FORCE: PROS AND CONS
Small, M., 2016. Privatisation of security and military functions and the demise of the modern
nation-state in Africa. Accord Occasional Paper, 26(2), pp.1-44.
Smith, J.A. ed., 2015. Qualitative psychology: A practical guide to research methods. London:
Sage.
Stachowitsch, S., 2013. Military privatization and the remasculinization of the state: Making the
link between the outsourcing of military security and gendered state
transformations. International Relations, 27(1), pp.74-94.
Taylor, S.J., Bogdan, R. and DeVault, M., 2015. Introduction to qualitative research methods: A
guidebook and resource. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.
Vrdoljak, A.F., 2016. Cultural Heritage, Human Rights and the Privatisation of War. Abingdon:
Routledge.
Walters, W. and D’Aoust, A.M., 2015. Bringing publics into critical security studies: notes for a
research strategy. Millennium, 44(1), pp.45-68.

36PRIVATISATION OF MILITARY FORCE: PROS AND CONS
Appendix
Activities Week 1 Week 3 Week 5 Week 7 Week 9 Week
11
Week
12
Selection of
research topic
✓
Reviewing
literature
✓
Setting the
research
methodology
✓
Collecting data ✓
Data analysis ✓
Drawing
conclusion and
recommendations
✓
Final submission ✓
Table: Gantt chart
(Source: Created by researcher)