책
Who dares profits.
세꼴
2007. 1. 1. 22:59
Private military companies
Who dares profits
"Why Britain is good at producing private military companies"
PRIVATE military companies, which provide armed guards for firms working in dangerous places, do not like being confused with mercenaries. The latter are useful for winning civil wars and toppling governments in resource-rich African states. Private military companies, though often staffed by ex-soldiers, are, by contrast, hired to protect engineers and guard government facilities. The blurring of this distinction in Iraq, where tales of gung-ho private military companies have multiplied along with a surge in demand for their services, has prompted the big British firms to find a way of distinguishing themselves from the rabble.
The result is a trade association, the British Association of Private Security Companies(BAPSC), which recently collected enough signatures to declare itself operational. Its charter includes un-mercenary promises to respect human rights and uphold British Foreign-policy aims.
"British companies are viewed as being particularly good at this kind of work," according to Chris Kinsey, an academic at King's College London who published a book on private military companies this week. While American firms tend to be larger than their British competitors (and tend to win the biggest contracts, which are handed out by the American government), British outfits grab more work from the private sector. Andy Bearpark, a former civil servant in the Department for International Development who chairs the BAPSC, reckons there are around 25 de-cent-sized security companies based in Britain. Their services are probably the nation's biggest export to Iraq.
Why are British companies so strong in this corner of the service sector?
The people who run them cite three reasons.
First, they entered the market early.
The collapse of Britain's empire after the second world war led to a flurry of inquiries from newly independent states in search of security and training nous from the former occupying power. Mr Kinsey says that the modern British Private military company has its roots in mercenary operations in the Middle East and Africa in the 1960s.
Second, the infant industry was boosted by the many energy and mining companies in London. Three early security companies-Saladin Security, Defence Systems and Control Risks-were created to provide services to them in the 1970s. Control Risks was founded in 1975 after Lloyd's, a venerable London insurance market, began selling kidnap insurance largely for the benefit of workers in these dangerous industries.
Third, British companies recruit from the British army, whose soldiers are reckoned to be good at keeping the peace by showing force without using it. Kroll, and American company that has a security arm based in Britain, reckons that soldiers trained to patrol Northern Ireland's perilous streets without shooting civilians make the best troops for delicate overseas security work. Despite evidence of Brits periodically discarding their training when dealing with Irqais, that reputation remains intact.
Who dares profits
"Why Britain is good at producing private military companies"
PRIVATE military companies, which provide armed guards for firms working in dangerous places, do not like being confused with mercenaries. The latter are useful for winning civil wars and toppling governments in resource-rich African states. Private military companies, though often staffed by ex-soldiers, are, by contrast, hired to protect engineers and guard government facilities. The blurring of this distinction in Iraq, where tales of gung-ho private military companies have multiplied along with a surge in demand for their services, has prompted the big British firms to find a way of distinguishing themselves from the rabble.
The result is a trade association, the British Association of Private Security Companies(BAPSC), which recently collected enough signatures to declare itself operational. Its charter includes un-mercenary promises to respect human rights and uphold British Foreign-policy aims.
"British companies are viewed as being particularly good at this kind of work," according to Chris Kinsey, an academic at King's College London who published a book on private military companies this week. While American firms tend to be larger than their British competitors (and tend to win the biggest contracts, which are handed out by the American government), British outfits grab more work from the private sector. Andy Bearpark, a former civil servant in the Department for International Development who chairs the BAPSC, reckons there are around 25 de-cent-sized security companies based in Britain. Their services are probably the nation's biggest export to Iraq.
Why are British companies so strong in this corner of the service sector?
The people who run them cite three reasons.
First, they entered the market early.
The collapse of Britain's empire after the second world war led to a flurry of inquiries from newly independent states in search of security and training nous from the former occupying power. Mr Kinsey says that the modern British Private military company has its roots in mercenary operations in the Middle East and Africa in the 1960s.
Second, the infant industry was boosted by the many energy and mining companies in London. Three early security companies-Saladin Security, Defence Systems and Control Risks-were created to provide services to them in the 1970s. Control Risks was founded in 1975 after Lloyd's, a venerable London insurance market, began selling kidnap insurance largely for the benefit of workers in these dangerous industries.
Third, British companies recruit from the British army, whose soldiers are reckoned to be good at keeping the peace by showing force without using it. Kroll, and American company that has a security arm based in Britain, reckons that soldiers trained to patrol Northern Ireland's perilous streets without shooting civilians make the best troops for delicate overseas security work. Despite evidence of Brits periodically discarding their training when dealing with Irqais, that reputation remains intact.
www.Economist.com