Are weak states victims of global forces or accomplices in the expansion of private security industry? This study, on behalf of Institute for Security Studies, Pretoria, South Africa, looks at the reasons for the proliferation of the private military contractors (PMCs) in Africa and focuses on the role of rulers of weak states. It looks at how states have become commercial intermediaries for western businesses and ignore the welfare of their citizens. African leaders need to understand that the existence of weak states constitutes a security threat to Africa.
Leaders of weak states, in a bid to outwit their rivals, have wilfully transformed their states into regimes that serve as agents of foreign interests. They have engaged in ‘imperialism by invitation’ in that they openly invite powerful private military companies (PMCs), to help them deal with local rivals who, in turn, have their own foreign connections and backing. In weak states, sovereignty is highly contested given that the state is an arena for local and global actors.
Private security companies have expanded into this space, offering military and police services that were previously the preserve of the state. This has jeopardised the state’s traditional monopoly on the means and resources of violence, thereby undermining the state’s sovereignty. More seriously, this trend has occurred in tandem with mercenary activities’ taking a corporate form and exploiting the natural resources of Africa. The danger posed by these private military and police forces is that they operate beyond the realm of legal accountability and public oversight, thereby threatening the state within which they operate, as well as its citizens. Because these private forces sell their services to whoever can afford them, they constitute a serious security risk in Africa.
But weak states cannot be regarded as innocent victims of external manipulation, which have fallen prey to the private security industry or powerful global forces that compromise their sovereignty and stability in order to exploit resources such as minerals and oil. Such an approach ignores:
- the dangerous agency of these leaders and how they invite private military forces to engage in African conflicts.
- the fact that these leaders are responsible for creating the disorder that allowed private military forces to intervene in their countries.
- the fact that if weak states were ever victims, they must be understood as willing victims presided over by cunning leaders who were able to operate within complex global commercial networks for personal interest, personal gain and regime security.
Weak states and their weak leaders are a major cause in the proliferation and growth of private military forces in Africa. Given that some African leaders rely heavily on these private military providers for their survival, the option to abolish the private security sector is ruled out.
- Any effective regulation of the private security sector must be preceded by research into the survival strategies of leaders of weak states.
- As long as rulers of weak states regard the private security sector as a prop rather than a danger to their power they will not cooperate with efforts to regulate the sector.
- African leaders should be more concerned about weak states as a direct enticement to the entry, proliferation and growth of the private security sector in Africa.
