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 shows how they adapted to the most modern types of conflict thanks to their business structure and flexibility in various scenarios. On the one hand, PMCs participate in combats, from troops through training or instruction programmes, having a strong impact on the development of conflicts. On the other hand, PSCs dedicate themselves to tasks related to security and guard duties like protection of facilities or personnel in at- risk zones. While they both provide services to governments, PMCs are employed in training military forces and taking part in conflict zones, and PSCs are used primarily for non-combat missions such as personnel protection abroad and site security. However, by the nature of their work, both PMCs and PSCs may be engaged in violent scenarios. Therefore, it is also generally accepted to refer to them as Private Military and Security companies (PMSCs). The employment of additional resources to the national armies is a phenomenon which requires a comprehensive regulation on a national and international level. It is necessary, however, to draw a line between PMCs and PSCs, even if the lack of regulation and the similarity of tasks unite them. If the classification of PMSCs personnel in concrete category under the Geneva Conventions seems complex, the distinction between soldiers and civilians nevertheless still has to be made to understand what they can and cannot do in conflicts, eventually having an incidence on the rules of engagement they have to follow and the protection they could be granted or not. 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. Analysing the relevant dispositions of International Law, this paper will try to clarify the risks and potential downfalls of employing such companies for domains normally part of State responsibilities solely. Furthermore, this paper will analyse the complex and fragmented legal framework governing these companies and their employment both on a European and national level, delving into the distinction of competencies between the EU and the national sovereignty of Member States, according to their own regulation on the matter. This will also be done through practical studies of the use of PMSCs in the Balkans region in the 1990s and in the Afghan conflict in the 21st century. Moreover, the paper will tackle the urgent necessity to strengthen the rules and norms that limit the actions of PMSCs to make sure that human rights and ethical boundaries are respected while they pursue their contracts.

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

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

Thermite-Equipped ‘Dragon’ Drones: Ukrainian Special Forces’ New Battlefield Arsenal

Ukrainian Special Forces have recently made use of a new generation of sophisticated drones, increasing their capacity to launch accurate strikes against Russian soldiers. These drones, referred to as ‘dragon drones,’ employ thermite, a highly incendiary chemical that burns at around 2,448 degrees Celsius (4,440 degrees Fahrenheit) (Lendon, 2024). This new strategy represents Ukraine’s shifting tactics in reaction to the ongoing conflict. It demonstrates Ukraine’s adjustement to the changing reality of the war, using cutting-edge drone technology and accurate attacks to outmanoeuvre its enemies.

Comments Off on Thermite-Equipped ‘Dragon’ Drones: Ukrainian Special Forces’ New Battlefield Arsenal

Cloud Computing in Defence

Information superiority is critical to modern combat, and in a changing digital landscape, investment in cloud technology is paramount to maintaining these defence capabilities. During warfare, military forces must gather and analyse extensive data to stay ahead of adversaries. However, warfare has evolved from traditional battles on land, sea and air to encompass various interrelated types of war, including cyberwarfare, information warfare, and space warfare. The evolution of warfare is compounded by the effects of technology, which increase the speed at which war is fought and managed. However, the success of decision-making that modern warfare requires relies on the ability of information technology systems to rapidly process large amounts of data (Defence One, n.d.). New technology is outperforming these older IT systems, and European militaries must adopt new technology, specifically Cloud computing to maintain information superiority which underpins successful warfare. Cloud will likely serve as the backbone of all future digital defence capabilities; thus, investment in this technology is fundamental to maintaining information superiority. Cloud is more than just a storage platform as it can host various computing tools that assist in information superiority through situational awareness, contributing to efficient decision-making during conflict. In 2019, the European Defence Agency financed a study about cloud computing for the defence sector (European Defence Agency, 2024). The EDA’s study, Cloud Intelligence for Decision-Making Support and Analysis (CLAUDIA), ended this January (European Defence Agency, 2024). The study was run in collaboration with GMV, a private capital technology business group (GVM, n.d.), and The Information Processing and Telecommunications Center (IP&T Center) (European Defence Agency, n.d.). This paper explores the notion of cloud computing, and using the case studies of CLAUDIA, NATO and the UK Ministry of Defence (MoD), it delves into three uses of cloud in the defence sector, including source analysis, edge computing and multi-domain operations. Finally, the analysis discusses challenges associated with cloud technology, including digital sovereignty and the need for cultural shifts within the defence sector.

Comments Off on Cloud Computing in Defence

The Crime of Genocide: an Analysis of the Legal Framework and the Srebrenica Case

In light of the horrific events of the Holocaust, which lacked a legal definition and regulation, the International Community and therefore the Nuremberg Tribunal recognised the urgent need of finding an adequate solution to this legal vacuum. Following several attempts of codification, finally in 1948 the United Nations General Assembly unanimously adopted the Genocide Convention. Said Convention defined genocide as “acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group” (Art. II, Genocide Convention, 1948). The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (1998) replicated the definition, but prosecuting the perpetrators of said actions and proving the required factual and mental element still poses challenges. After a brief overview of the International and European Community’s inadequate response to the Bosnian War (1992-1995) and the outcome of said inadequacy, the paper will analyse the relevant legal framework of genocide, focusing on the crime's codification and challenges in proving the intent above. Finally, the paper will present Ratko Mladić’s case before the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, which led to the individual's prosecution and life sentence for the crime of genocide in the Srebrenica massacre.

Comments Off on The Crime of Genocide: an Analysis of the Legal Framework and the Srebrenica Case