Abstract
The widespread use of private military and security companies (PMSCs) in United Nations peacebuilding missions often undermines the effectiveness of these missions. PMSCs tend to encourage, in unnecessary ways, what is called security risk management and promote the militarization of humanitarian efforts. They encourage humanitarian aid organizations to protect their personnel with barbed wire fences, security guards, armed convoys, and secure aid compounds, even if the security risks are relatively low. Consequently, these militarized humanitarian efforts heighten the perception of risks and intensify security measures, which create physical and psychological barriers between humanitarian aid personnel and the local communities in which they carry out their tasks. This situation undermines local ownership of peacebuilding efforts and makes them less responsive to the local communities involved in these efforts. This article provides a comparative analysis of the nature of this problem and its effects in the Global South.
Highlights
The global market for private military and security companies (PMSCs) has expanded dramatically since the end of the Cold War.1 These companies gained prominence during the US-led wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, where companies like Blackwater became a topic of much controversy (see, for example, BBC News 2008, Journal of Developing Societies (2021): 1–31Broder & Knowlton, 2020)
Before presenting our analysis that builds those arguments, we provide a critical review of the literature on the consequences of security privatization and conceptualize the conditions for effective peacebuilding
We argue that PMSCs tend to claim special authority to organize security risk management and disempower alternative political and non-militaristic efforts to address security risks
Summary
The global market for private military and security companies (PMSCs) has expanded dramatically since the end of the Cold War (del Prado, 2011, p. 151).1 These companies gained prominence during the US-led wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, where companies like Blackwater became a topic of much controversy (see, for example, BBC News 2008, Journal of Developing Societies (2021): 1–31Broder & Knowlton, 2020). The involvement of PMSCs in peacebuilding tends to reduce local public security and thereby undermines the effectiveness of the mission, while potentially bolstering the interests of the US military–industrial complex that includes PMSCs. Towards the end of the 1990s, peacebuilding missions became more ambitious and have increasingly taken place in an environment of ongoing conflict or where peace is inconclusive and highly contested
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
