Private Security Industry must be made transparent and accountable, study concludes

Feb 19, 2013

The true cost of war is being masked by the secretive and largely unaccountable activities of a private security industry, according to a new study.

These invisible costs of war – both in terms of casualties and financial resources – are not reported and are hard to find because contractors are not subject to the same reporting structures and laws as the regular military, and many of their activities are protected from Freedom of Information requests. Private security firms – usually run by former senior figures in the military, civil service or politics – are increasingly taking on the role of the military services, but are not subject to the same scrutiny, says a recent paper published in the journal Organization.

Private contractors are widely used by states such as Britain and the United States. In conflict zones such as Iraq and Afghanistan, contractors undertake both military activity and roles such as guarding bases, commercial enterprises and government installations; providing escort services for convoys; or bodyguarding individuals, according to the study. This creates opportunities for investment in the private , at the same time as reducing the financial burdens that military interventions traditionally bring to the occupying state.

The paper from Richard Godfrey, Jo Brewis, Jo Grady and Chris Grocott, all academics at the University of Leicester School of Management, argues that the failure to establish appropriate regulation has resulted in a lack of transparency and accountability. It also argues that the private security firms and governments that employ them should be more open about the way the industry is organised and managed.

Secrecy over the employment of civilians for roles previously undertaken by the military hampers any real attempt at greater public and political debate, say the authors

"These are commercial organisations that form a global industry worth billions of pounds and which impacts on thousands of lives – civilian and military," comments the paper, The Private Security Industry and Neoliberal Imperialism – Mapping the Terrain.

"The lack of oversight and reporting hides the true costs of current military activity. The death and injury count for private contractors is not recorded and there is even less data on the deaths and injuries they cause in any theatre of operations."

Since 1990 the private security industry has witnessed a decade-on-decade market growth rate of 100 per cent and in 2010 the industry's British arm won a record £29 million in government contracts for operations in Afghanistan alone.

As state powers are delegated to the private sector, the study identifies "the emergence of a new security-industrial complex" being run largely by social elites made up of former senior , public officials and government ministers.

Explore further: Art of Science 2014: Princeton launches online galleries of prize-winning images and video

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

Growth in military contracting blurs lines of accountability

Mar 09, 2009

The thriving use of private military contractors in place of citizen-soldiers allows nations to externalize the costs of war and outsource accountability during wartime, according to sociologist Katherine McCoy, writing in ...

Recommended for you

How to win a Tour de France sprint

Jul 22, 2014

The final dash to the line in a Tour de France sprint finish may appear to the bystander to be a mess of bodies trying to cram into the width of a road, but there is a high degree of strategy involved. It ...

Bible museum planned for US capital

Jul 18, 2014

The devout Christian family that upended a part of President Barack Obama's health care law aims to open a Bible museum in Washington in 2017, a spokesperson for the project said Friday.

User comments : 1

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

Caliban
not rated yet Feb 19, 2013
Historically speaking, Mercenary armies --and make no mistake, that's what we're talking about here-- have been very difficult to administer, control, or hold accountable, and are known to seriously and/or catastrophically bungle their missions, often in ways that turn the tide in a given conflict and bringing to ruin their employers --whether those be governments, churches, corporations, or groups of citizens.

And yet, we sit complacently by while they are increasingly used as "security contractors" in the most militarily-sensitive regions of the world.

What could possibly go wrong?

And yet,