| |||||
Corporate Warriors: The Rise of the Privatized Military Industry (Cornell Studies in Security Affairs)
Books: Text Books: Corporate: Item 5
|
Corporate Warriors: The Rise of the Privatized Military Industry (Cornell Studies in Security Affairs)by P. W. Singer
|
31 of 31 people found the following review helpful: An great look inside the modern private military companies, February 17, 2006 Reviewer:A. Sandoc "sussarakhen" (San Pablo, California United States) - P.W. Singer has written a very insightful and detailed look into the modernization and globalization of the private military firms. The private military firm is not a new concept but actually dates back thousands of years. These firms are better known under the more controversial name: mercenaries. It'd be unfair to say that all private military firms are like the mercenary companies of old. Sure there are still flight-by-night firms that hire themselves out to the highest bidder, switching allegiances on a dime, and committing acts of brutality that made them so infamous during the African civil war and wars of liberation in the late 1950's and through most of the 1960's. The modern private military firm as described by Singer has more in common with corporations that deal in outsourcing specific jobs. Corporate Warriors goes through in describing the many different types of firms. From the provider firms like Executive Outcomes (a famous early 90's firm created by former South African military operatives) which take a fron-line role in training, advising and fighting for their clients. Then there's firms like the US-based MPR who provide military assistance in the form of advisors that range from ex-generals to former veteren noncoms. The third type would be firms like Halliburton who provide non-combat services (mess hall, laundry, logistics, etc...) for the US Military and its allies. What all these types of private military firms have in common is in the way they are run. These firms are run like Fortune 500 firms and alot of the companies in the Fortune 500 make use of these firms' services. Whether for help in negotiating with the governments of third world nations to security detail for corporate officers. These firms in the last decade or so have seen a rise in their profits as the US government and its military services have begun outsourcing noncombat duties to outside firms. It is this new practice begun by the US and mirrored by its allies that Singer points should be a concern. Such firms are not bound by the rules of war and engagement. They also don't fall under the rules of the Geneva Convention in terms of prisoner status in the event employees of such firms become so. With the proliferation of PMF operatives and advisors in combat zones around the world it's inevitable that such employees will become front-line participants in such conflicts instead of staying out in the sidelines. One prime example of such an occurence was the ambush and killing of four Blackwater security operatives in Iraq. In fact, employees of these PMF's account for a very lrage percentage of civilian contractors killed in Iraq and Afghanistan. Another example where the line between military and civilian has blurred has been the use of civilian contractors to advise and conduct interrogations not just in Abu Ghraib, Iraq but also in Guantanamo Bay. Such a blurring of the lines has led to corruption and criminal acts. Singer points this out in detail and sees the trend of governments using civilian contractors to supplement their military more and more in the years to come as a dangerous shift in miitary policy. Singer doesn't just point out the negative consequences of overuse of the PMF's. He also acknowledges that such firms does provide great service to their clients and have become an integral part of the global economy. Singer knows that like any industry the private military firms are here to stay, but with more governmental accountability and oversight of these firms then their negative impact on the political and strategic arena can be minimized. I highly recommend this book as it takes a centrist approach in dealing with the subject of private military firms and the issues their sudden rise as a power industry has brought to the forefront.
From Publishers Weekly
A security analyst at the Brookings Institution, Singer raises disturbing new issues in this comprehensive analysis of a post-Cold War phenomenon: private companies offering specialized military services for hire. These organizations are nothing like the mercenary formations that flourished in post-independence Africa, whose behavior there earned them the nickname les affreux: "the frightful ones." Today's corporate war-making agencies are bought and sold by Fortune 500 firms. Even some UN peacekeeping experts, Singer reports, advocate their use on grounds of economy and efficiency. Governments see in them a means of saving money-and sometimes a way to use low-profile force to solve awkward, potentially embarrassing situations that develop on the fringes of policy. Singer describes three categories of privatized military systems. "Provider firms" (the best known being the now reorganized Executive Outcomes) offer direct, tactical military assistance ranging from training programs and staff services to front-line combat. "Consulting firms," like the U.S.-based Military Professional Resources Inc., draw primarily on retired senior officers to provide strategic and administrative expertise on a contract basis. The ties of such groups to their country of origin, Singer finds, can be expected to weaken as markets become more cosmopolitan. Finally, the overlooked "support firms," like Brown & Root, provide logistic and maintenance services to armed forces preferring (or constrained by budgetary factors) to concentrate their own energies on combat. Singer takes pains to establish the improvements in capability and effectiveness privatization allows, ranging from saving money to reducing human suffering by ending small-scale conflicts. He is, however, far more concerned with privatization's negative implications. technical issues, like contract problems, may lead to an operation ending without regard to a military rationale. A much bigger problem is the risk of States losing control of military policy to militaries outside the state systems, responsible only to their clients, managers, and stockholders, Singer emphasizes. So far, private military organizations have behaved cautiously, but there is no guarantee will continue. Nor can the moralities of business firms be necessarily expected to accommodate such niceties as the laws of war. Singer recommends increased oversight as a first step in regulation, an eminently reasonable response to a still imperfectly understood development in war making.
Copyright 2003 Reed business Information, Inc.
The Atlantic Monthly
"Provides a sweeping survey of the work of MPRI, Airscan, Dyncorp, Brown & Root, and scores of other firms"
Shop Bookstores:
Books
Resources
Most Watched Book Auctions
Corporate at Sduf
News To Peruse
More Subjects
Book Review Directory
Reviewed Authors
Reviewed Titles
Review List
Site Map
