Privatisation of Security: The legal Status and Responsibilities of Private Military Companies in European Missions

The rise of Private Military Companies (PMCs) and Private Security Companies (PSCs) in military or civilian missions stands as an important change in the dynamics of the security and defence world, as they change how operations can be conducted, especially for armed forces. Dating back to the Middle Ages with mercenaries, they have taken different forms throughout history. Nowadays, they deliver a large span of services (from indirect support in logistics or military counselling to taking part directly in combat). This paper will present their blurred status in law and their duties in missions led by European Member States, taking a look at the existing legislation and tools to hold them responsible for their actions.

Comments Off on Privatisation of Security: The legal Status and Responsibilities of Private Military Companies in European Missions

Rethinking the Concept of Air Superiority: From Sine Qua Non Towards Interoperability 

For decades, gaining and maintaining air superiority has been a linchpin for the Western perception of military power. In contrast, due to geopolitical and technological factors, Russia has historically relied on air power as a supplementary tool for achieving victory on the ground (Grimshaw, 2017). Developments of the 21st century, especially within the technological realm, have, however, proven both of these doctrines to be incapable of reflecting modern battlefield challenges. The evolution of air defences, massive deployment of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) and modernized electronic warfare (EW) tools are making the third domain more complex and restricted than ever. The ongoing Russia-Ukraine war has proven that uncontested dominance of the skies is neither guaranteed nor a sustainable task. Lethal air defence, a subdomain of air littoral consisting of thousands of drones and limited air sorties, have forced both sides to rethink the concept of air dominance and its role within the conflict. While the definition of air superiority remains clear, the necessity of achieving this objective as the sine qua non is diminishing as a new subdomain of the air littoral dominated by UAVs is emerging. Thus, rather than fully controlling and freely manoeuvring within the air domain, both sides pursue so-called ‘windows of opportunity’ (Gunzinger, 2024). This paper argues that the traditional view of air supremacy, central to Western military thinking, is no longer an adequate strategy against the peer or predominant opponent. The failure of the Russian Air Force (VVS) to establish air superiority on the first day of aggression was surprising and gave valuable lessons for military strategists. This conflict underlines the challenges in achieving total air dominance in the face of advanced air defence, UAV proliferation and EW capabilities. Thus, there is an essential need to rethink the air power concept, arguing for focusing on limited air superiority in times and places of choosing. In this context, Suppression and Destruction of Enemy Air Defences operations appear to be a crucial strategy. Finally, this paper underlines the implications for Western military thinking regarding air power theory, which is needed to operate within growingly contested airspace. In the face of the modern operational environment, emphasis on joint operations and interoperability in executing successful air campaigns is crucial.

Comments Off on Rethinking the Concept of Air Superiority: From Sine Qua Non Towards Interoperability 

NATO Multi- Domain Operations: challenges for the European Land Forces

The paper analyses NATO’s move towards Multi-Domain Operations (MDO), where cyber and space domains are incorporated into conventional warfare, moving beyond joint operations. The paper highlights the primary challenges NATO faces in implementing MDO: operational adaptability, institutional coordination, technological disparities, and command-and-control structures. Consistent military doctrines within NATO Member States, recognising their historical events and cultural differences, are necessary to avoid doctrinal impediments, stressing the importance of a shared structure and vocabulary to improve coordination and efficiency in operations. The paper outlines the institutional obstacles, like NATO’s absent role in coordinating the implementation of MDO, and how this translates into diverging pathways to operationalise the concept. Furthermore, challenges in technological disparities and budgetary contributions are outlined, followed by an analysis of the command-and-control structures indicating the need for Europe to seek models to develop an MDO- capable fighting force. The paper ends with a key findings section outlining the primary challenges and providing specific solutions to tackle them.

Comments Off on NATO Multi- Domain Operations: challenges for the European Land Forces

Prisoner Swap Between Russia and Ukraine 

On August 24th, 2024, Ukraine and Russia exchanged 115 prisoners of war (POW) on each side. This deal was the first exchange since Ukraine launched a surprise invasion of the Kursk region on August 6th (Al Jazeera 2024). The United Arab Emirates (UAE) facilitated the deal between the two countries (Al Jazeera 2024). This exchange is a crucial reminder of the human cost of war and the ongoing need for diplomatic intervention. It underscores the ongoing humanitarian efforts amidst the brutal conflict and highlights the importance of diplomatic channels, such as the UAE’s mediation, in easing tensions.

Comments Off on Prisoner Swap Between Russia and Ukraine 

Natural and Artificial Intelligence in Armed Conflict: Exploring Settled and Open Legal Questions with Dustin A. Lewis

Based in The Hague, the T.M.C. Asser Instituut is a distinguished organization funded in 1965 that conducts independent, policy-oriented research in International and European law. The centre promotes expertise through different initiatives, including two noteworthy lecture series, “Designing International Law and Ethics into Military and Artificial Intelligence” (DILEMA), and “Hague Initiative for Law and Armed Conflict” (HILAC). At the intersection of the two educational programs, on Thursday July 11th, researcher Dustin A. Lewis gave a lecture on ‘Natural and artificial intelligence in armed conflict’. The DILEMA-HILAC lecture, held by Dustin A. Lewis, explored and analysed fundamental settled and open legal questions related to natural and artificial intelligence in armed conflict. Dustin A. Lewis is the current Research Director of the Harvard Law School Program on International Law and Armed Conflict (HLS PILAC), as well as an Associate Senior Researcher in the Governance of Artificial Intelligence Program at the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI). On Thursday’s lecture, the researcher presented a wide range of potential applications of artificial intelligence (AI) in the military domain, exploring the legal relationship between natural and artificial intelligence in armed conflict. In a timely discussion, Mr. Lewis reflected on the need for regulations concerning the military use of AI, States’ legal obligations and the importance of accountability.

Comments Off on Natural and Artificial Intelligence in Armed Conflict: Exploring Settled and Open Legal Questions with Dustin A. Lewis