Non-Profit Mercenaries

While Masterton admits this could appear self-serving, he argues that it is merely an attempt to legitimize reality. For, despite the convention against mercenaries, governments are increasingly using civilian employees to do jobs once reserved for those in uniform. In his recent book, Corporate Warriors, Peter Singer estimates that privatized military services now amount to a $100-billion (U.S.) industry. This covers everything from the lone mercenary with a gun to the private companies, like DynCorp and Vinnell Corp, hired by the U.S. government in Iraq to build and maintain camps, conduct surveillance and security, and even train the new Iraqi army.

The sector is booming, says Mats Berdal, an expert in peacekeeping at Kings College, because governments sometimes use these companies to do things they cannot do openly. Hiring a private company also means that when their employees are killed, there are no flag-draped coffins to make the news back home.

Of course, non-profit or not, a business is a business. And ultimate accountability remains a stumbling block: if one of the main problems facing peace operations at the moment is the sluggishness with which national governments on the UN Security Council come to a consensus, who exactly will be calling in Masterton’s fighters?

He talks of some sort of international advisory council vetting requests from governments teetering on the brink of conflict and from legitimate opposition groups being unfairly targeted. But it’s not quite clear how this would work. “It is the thorniest area,” he concedes.

Nevertheless, he and his colleagues are forging ahead, testing their idea with academics and military think-tanks. Strangely, it’s not the mercenary label they fear most; it’s being called idealists for thinking that a new, untried company can rewrite international law and resolve the problem of peacekeeping by bringing in private-sector know-how. “Idealistic can be a dangerous word,” Masterton says