[ABANDONED] The Mercenary Convention

[New Korongo]

I realise that I do not have enough endorsements to submit a proposal yet, but this is my first draft and I would like it to receive as much criticism as possible before I do eventually submit it. This criticism will hopefully allow me to bring the draft up to an adequate standard for the World Assembly or, at the very lest, prevent me from embarrassingly submitting a proposal that is illegal

The Mercenary Convention
A resolution to improve world security by boosting police and military budgets.

Category: International Security | Strength: Significant | Proposed by: New Korongo

The World Assembly,

ACKNOWLEDGING that private military contractors are commonly used to supplement, or even replace, conventional military forces,

REALIZING that private military contractors are sometimes used in bad faith to circumvent international laws pertaining to armed conflict,

CONCERNED that private military contractors are not subject to the same protections and restrictions as other combatants in an armed conflict,

Hereby,

DEFINES

• A “private military contractor” (“PMC”) as an individual engaging in military action primarily for private financial and/or material gain who is not a member of a conventional military force.
• A “customer member state” as a member state which contracts with a corresponding PMC.

ESTABLISHES the World Assembly PMC Committee with the aim of:

1. Observing the activities of member states with regard to PMCs.
2. Monitoring the operations of PMCs that serve customer member states.
3. Keeping a universal register of all PMCs that serve customer member states.
4. Creating public reports which detail the practices of PMCs, and their casualties sustained in combat.

PROHIBITS

1. A PMC from receiving immunity from civil and/or criminal judgment and punishment by mere virtue of being a PMC.
2. A PMC from using weapons which the armed forces of member states are prohibited from using under international law.
3. A PMC engaged in combat during an armed conflict from intentionally concealing himself or herself as a non-combatant.
4. A PMC headquartered in or receiving a significant portion of its revenue from one member state from contracting with another member state that is opposed to the first in an armed conflict.

REQUIRES

1. A PMC to follow the rules of engagement the customer member state establishes for non-PMC combatants.
2. Member states to treat enemy PMCs encountered during an armed conflict with the same rights as a non-PMC combatants.
3. A PMC to send a list of casualties sustained during an armed conflict at its cessation to the World Assembly PMC Committee.
4. PMCs operating within the territories of member states, or contracting for customer member states, to register with the World Assembly PMC Committee.

The Mercenary Convention
A resolution to improve world security by boosting police and military budgets.

Category: International Security | Strength: Significant | Proposed by: New Korongo

The World Assembly,

ACKNOWLEDGING that mercenaries are commonly used to supplement, or even replace, conventional military forces,

REALIZING that the activities of mercenaries and private military companies are not restricted,

CONCERNED that mercenaries are not subject to the same protections as other combatants in an armed conflict,

Hereby,

DEFINES

• A “Mercenary” as a combatant who serves to assist a military force purely for monetary gain.
• A “Private Military Company” as an organisation primarily intended to offer the services provided by mercenaries.

ESTABLISHES the World Assembly Mercenary Committee with the aim of:

1. Monitoring the operations of mercenaries and private military companies in service with member states.
2. Keeping a universal register of mercenaries and private military companies in service with member states.
3. Observing the compliance of member states in regard to this resolution.

PROHIBITS

1. A mercenary or private military company from switching support to an opposing faction during an armed conflict.
2. A mercenary from intentionally concealing themselves as a non-combatant during an armed conflict.
3. A mercenary from violating the rules of engagement established by the customer during an armed conflict.

REQUIRES

1. A mercenary or private military company to give three months’ notice before ending its services with a customer.
2. All mercenaries or private military companies operating in member states to register with the World Assembly Mercenary Committee.
3. Member states to treat enemy mercenaries encountered during a conflict with the same rights that they would provide any other combatant.

[Veroxia]

Interesting. I think more should be added. But good start Korongo!

[Stomalia]

Nice draft, yet I will probably disobey every rule stated in it as an imperialist nation that use mercenaries quite often.

[Separatist Peoples]

Nice draft, yet I will probably disobey every rule stated in it as an imperialist nation that use mercenaries quite often.

Not possible. The WA gnomes force you to comply with resolutions. From what our intelligence assets and their close, if not human, partners have gleaned is true, Stomalians can be trusted to be duplicitous and covetous, so this is hardly a surprise.

[The Dark Star Republic]

"I'm not opposed to the regulation of PMCs. But isn't this, essentially, just an extension of basic contract law?

CONCERNED that mercenaries are not subject to the same protections as other combatants in an armed conflict,

"I find the tone of this mildly concerning. Shouldn't we also be making sure that mercenaries are subject to the same regulations, and not merely 'protections'?"

[New Korongo]

"I'm not opposed to the regulation of PMCs. But isn't this, essentially, just an extension of basic contract law?

Certain sections of the Mercenary Convention could undoubtedly considered extensions of basic contract law, but is developing these laws into international law so that they apply to all mercenary operations in all member states such a bad thing? Especially we when consider the fact that mercenaries are often involved in international confrontations which involve the legal systems of two or more nations interacting violently? With that said, there are also sections of the Mercenary Convention which are aimed at giving mercenaries the same rights and restrictions as other combatants.

CONCERNED that mercenaries are not subject to the same protections as other combatants in an armed conflict,

"I find the tone of this mildly concerning. Shouldn't we also be making sure that mercenaries are subject to the same regulations, and not merely 'protections'?"

This is a good point, and I will modify the line to the following:

CONCERNED that mercenaries are not subject to the same protections and restrictions as other combatants in an armed conflict.

[Point Breeze]

I encourage you to read over the following historical debates:

http://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=189686
http://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=243727

[Pacifist Chipmunks]

PROHIBITS

1. A mercenary or private military company from switching support to an opposing faction during an armed conflict.
2. A mercenary from intentionally concealing themselves as a non-combatant during an armed conflict.
3. A mercenary from violating the rules of engagement established by the customer during an armed conflict.

REQUIRES

1. A mercenary or private military company to give three months’ notice before ending its services with a customer.
2. All mercenaries or private military companies operating in member states to register with the World Assembly Mercenary Committee.
3. Member states to treat enemy mercenaries encountered during a conflict with the same rights that they would provide any other combatant.

We are not too thrilled about the first bullets of each of these lists. These eventualities (a mercenary abandoning his or her patron) represent costs inherently associated with privatizing the military. If you eliminate or reduce these costs by WA fiat, privatizing the military becomes more economical and thus it will become more widespread. This, we feel, is a negative outcome. We favorably view a proposal that binds mercenaries to the rules of engagement, but we do not support a proposal that would encourage mercenary usage in general.

[Al Hasakah]

Though I am not a WA Member, I thought you might appreciate a bit of well meaning criticism.

First off, that is not a good definition of Mercenary and going by that definition, there will be several occasions a sly PMC could work around your Resolution. Defining a Mercenary as someone who serves to assist a military force is not comprehensive as it excludes occasions when the Mercenary could be assisting private companies such as news networks or assisting Embassy staff.

Secondly, prohibiting a Mercenary intentionally concealing themselves as a non-combatant during an armed conflict could be very endangering, depending on the contract the Mercenary is undertaking. In certain situations, such as escorting news personnel, it is almost a necessity that the security adviser or mercenary that is assisting them is deliberately dressed in inconspicuous clothing as to make themselves and the party they are escorting less of a target to hostiles.

Thirdly, forcing a PMC to give three months notice to a client before severing a contract is a very bad idea. There are a multitude of factors that would mean the PMC has to sever the contract on very short notice, such as in the USG Security Corporation's case, they reserve the right to leave a contract immediately if Neu Engollon is attacked.

Finally, I recommend some sort of requirement for PMCs to send details of Mercenaries killed after deployment to the WAMC so that the details can be processed about how many are Mercenaries are dying and correct figures published. Or something like that.

[Pacifist Chipmunks]

OOC: Okay, so this is probably taking way too much liberty with your draft. But I thought I would rewrite it as I would prefer it. The historical debates previously referenced in this thread are interesting and educational. They show that this type of proposal has been attempted several times without success. Please take as much or as little from my rewrite as you like--it's just my opinion of where it should go. This is your proposal so it's up to you what to include.

The Mercenary Convention
A resolution to improve world security by boosting police and military budgets.

Category: International Security | Strength: Significant | Proposed by: New Korongo

The World Assembly,

ACKNOWLEDGING that private military contractors are commonly used to supplement, or even replace, conventional military forces,

REALIZING that private military contractors are sometimes used in bad faith to circumvent regulatory and legal war standards, including rules of engagement,

Hereby,

DEFINES

• A “private military contractor” ("PMC") as a party engaging in military action for financial or non-financial consideration who is not an employee and/or enlisted member of conventional military forces.
• A "customer member state" as the member state which contracts with a corresponding PMC.

ESTABLISHES the World Assembly PMC Committee with the aim of:

1. Monitoring the operations of PMCs in service with member states.
2. Keeping a universal register of PMCs in service with member states.
3. Observing member states' activities with regard to PMCs.
4. Publishing reports of best practices and of worst practices with regard to PMCs.

PROHIBITS

1. A PMC engaged in combat from intentionally concealing himself or herself as a non-combatant.
2. A PMC from receiving immunity from civil and/or criminal judgment and punishment by mere virtue of being a PMC.
3. A PMC headquartered in or receiving a material portion of its revenue from one customer member state from contracting with a another customer member state that is opposed to the first customer member nation in armed conflict.

REQUIRES

1. PMCs operating in member states to register with the World Assembly PMC Committee.
2. A PMC to follow the rules of engagement the customer member state establishes for non-PMC combatants.
3. Member states to treat enemy PMCs encountered in an armed conflict with the same rights as non-PMC combatants.

IC:
Key changes:
1) We do not like "mercenary", because we think it has negative connotations; unless the proposal is about outlawing them, we prefer a different term for these private military contractors.

2) We do not feel that the legal form of the PMC is material to this proposal, so we have removed the definition of a PMC company and replaced it with a definition of the client member state.

3) The primary concern we see about PMCs is that they are motivated by external rewards--usually money--so they might have incentive to shade the quality of their work in ways normal enlisted soldiers have little to no incentive to do. Ceteris paribus, PMCs would seem more likely to act outside of the rules of war, to increase risks to civilians, and to commit war crimes. Their motivation is their financial rewards, not patriotism to their customer. Because enlisted soldiers (especially volunteer soldiers) are motivated by patriotism they are more likely to recognize that war crimes and actions that increase the risks to civilians run counter to the greater interests of the nation they love. PMCs not so much; the presence of financial incentive narrows PMCs' focus to the external reward they will receive from the customer, rather than the holistic interests of the customer. Based on this we tried to elaborate on those points that restrict PMCs and removed most of the clauses that benefit PMCs.

4) Because of this change in focus, the draft we put together might actually be more of a global disarmament or human rights proposal...hrm.

Best of Luck!

-Bombous Hecklesprecht


EDIT: Also, based on our point (1), we think it would do well with a title change. But we're not sure what to replace it with: Private Military Contractors? Is that too long?

EDIT (way late): changed "individual" to "party".

[New Potatoezstan]

Pacifist Chipmunks version of the draft is much better in my opinion.

[Point Breeze]

I also support Pacifist Chipmunks' draft, however I still think the definition of "mercenary" can be improved, with consideration for the variety of services PMC's provide.

[Rotwood]

Agreed with the above.

We do wonder, however, if there should be something mentioned of non-WA based PMCs working with WA nations. We understand that WA resolutions don't apply to non-members, but we don't want that to be used as a loophole to allow PMCs to get away with criminal activity.

[Point Breeze]

Agreed with the above.

We do wonder, however, if there should be something mentioned of non-WA based PMCs working with WA nations. We understand that WA resolutions don't apply to non-members, but we don't want that to be used as a loophole to allow PMCs to get away with criminal activity.

I suggest adding a clause that declares any PMC wishing to contract with a WA member state agrees to abide by this law. I don't think that PMC's can be classified as WA or non-WA, since they're mostly non-state actors.

[Rotwood]

Agreed with the above.

We do wonder, however, if there should be something mentioned of non-WA based PMCs working with WA nations. We understand that WA resolutions don't apply to non-members, but we don't want that to be used as a loophole to allow PMCs to get away with criminal activity.

I suggest adding a clause that declares any PMC wishing to contract with a WA member state agrees to abide by this law. I don't think that PMC's can be classified as WA or non-WA, since they're mostly non-state actors, Commoner League excluded.

Well do corporations headquartered outside the WA have to abide by WA regulations when dealing with WA nations? I just want to rule out the "We aren't based in the WA so your rules don't apply" option, that's all

[Herzil]

2 issues:

First you are trying to bring mercenaries to the same category as national Army and thats a problem because as you stated they are "here" to gain a reward aka money and therefor they dont act under the same arguments that normal soldiers who defend their country or attack have.

Second it seems that the prohibit restrictions are meant mostly to protect the clients which is Ok but it goes against the essence of being a mercenary. if one is motivated by money - why shouldnt s/he switch if better offer presented itself? so this section actually transform the mercenary into a normal soldier.

Other than that its a great idea and there shouldnt be any reason why mercenaries wont be accountable and judged under the same laws of normal soldier (as it doesnt matter if it was a soldier or a mercenary who shot and killed)

[The Republic of Mattlandia]

From Ambassador Page,

Mattlandia officially approves of this Convention, but is concerned about one of the prohibitions of being able to switch to an enemy faction. This is often a thing that happens in the world, and neither
do we condone it, but this can be considered a tactic, where one can pretend to switch, like a double agent, and it should be the decision of the mercenary to risk his/her own life to switch.

[Common Territories]

Agreed with the above.

We do wonder, however, if there should be something mentioned of non-WA based PMCs working with WA nations. We understand that WA resolutions don't apply to non-members, but we don't want that to be used as a loophole to allow PMCs to get away with criminal activity.

I suggest adding a clause that declares any PMC wishing to contract with a WA member state agrees to abide by this law. I don't think that PMC's can be classified as WA or non-WA, since they're mostly non-state actors, Commoner League excluded.

Just to clarify, since I've seen my storefront pinged here. My storefront is not aligned with any state or other national organizations (such as nations, alliances, etc.). Although it shares good relations with TECT, my nation and its home country, it doesn't mean it is aligned with it. That's all I wanted to say in order to clarify this comment.

[Point Breeze]

I suggest adding a clause that declares any PMC wishing to contract with a WA member state agrees to abide by this law. I don't think that PMC's can be classified as WA or non-WA, since they're mostly non-state actors, Commoner League excluded.

Well do corporations headquartered outside the WA have to abide by WA regulations when dealing with WA nations? I just want to rule out the "We aren't based in the WA so your rules don't apply" option, that's all

I think we're getting at a more fundamental question - does the WA legislate on entities inside member states, or can it only compel member states to enact such legislation?

My answer would be, yes, such corporations would be bound by WA laws, the same way agents of corporations are bound when they enter a member state's territory.

@Common Territories
My mistake. i was unsure of the relationship between the two entities after I reread my first post. If you'd like, I can amend it and remove the reference.

[Common Territories]

Well do corporations headquartered outside the WA have to abide by WA regulations when dealing with WA nations? I just want to rule out the "We aren't based in the WA so your rules don't apply" option, that's all

I think we're getting at a more fundamental question - does the WA legislate on entities inside member states, or can it only compel member states to enact such legislation?

My answer would be, yes, such corporations would be bound by WA laws, the same way agents of corporations are bound when they enter a member state's territory.

@Common Territories
My mistake. i was unsure of the relationship between the two entities after I reread my first post. If you'd like, I can amend it and remove the reference.

You may if you'd like. I just wanted this to be clarified; because if anything, the two sides are friends but not tied to each other.

[Artstotszka]

Artstotszka will support this proposal, but we lobby that pacifist chipmunks draft be used, for it better defines PMCs

-Ambassador Alina Bazhenov, Artstotszkan Ambassador to the WA

[Bears Armed]

I think we're getting at a more fundamental question - does the WA legislate on entities inside member states, or can it only compel member states to enact such legislation?

The latter.

[New Korongo]

The Mercenary Convention
A resolution to improve world security by boosting police and military budgets.

Category: International Security | Strength: Significant | Proposed by: New Korongo

The World Assembly,

ACKNOWLEDGING that private military contractors are commonly used to supplement, or even replace, conventional military forces,

REALIZING that private military contractors are sometimes used in bad faith to circumvent international laws pertaining to armed conflict,

CONCERNED that private military contractors are not subject to the same protections and restrictions as other combatants in an armed conflict,

Hereby,

DEFINES

• A “private military contractor” (“PMC”) as an individual engaging in military action primarily for private financial and/or material gain who is not a member of a conventional military force.
• A “customer member state” as a member state which contracts with a corresponding PMC.

ESTABLISHES the World Assembly PMC Committee with the aim of:

1. Observing the activities of member states with regard to PMCs.
2. Monitoring the operations of PMCs that serve customer member states.
3. Keeping a universal register of all PMCs that serve customer member states.
4. Creating public reports which detail the practices of PMCs, and their casualties sustained in combat.

PROHIBITS

1. A PMC from receiving immunity from civil and/or criminal judgment and punishment by mere virtue of being a PMC.
2. A PMC from using weapons which the armed forces of member states are prohibited from using by international law.
3. A PMC engaged in combat during an armed conflict from intentionally concealing himself or herself as a non-combatant.
4. A PMC headquartered in or receiving a significant portion of its revenue from one member state from contracting with another member state that is opposed to the first in an armed conflict.

REQUIRES

1. A PMC to follow the rules of engagement the customer member state establishes for non-PMC combatants.
2. Member states to treat enemy PMCs encountered during an armed conflict with the same rights as a non-PMC combatants.
3. A PMC to send a list of casualties sustained during an armed conflict at its cessation to the World Assembly PMC Committee.
4. PMCs operating within the territories of member states, or contracting for customer member states, to register with the World Assembly PMC Committee.

Here is the latest version of the draft, which incorporates much of what Pacifist Chipmunks added to my original draft as well as a couple of new ideas. The most notable change is replacing the term “mercenary” with “private military contractor”, which seems to be supported by many people. This is a wise change, and I wish to thank those who suggested it. I have not yet changed the planned title of the resolution, as anything I can think of with “private military contractor” seems to be too long for the 30 character limit. Once again, thanks to everyone that is criticising the Mercenary Convention.

[Separatist Peoples]

Very nice. A few concerns...

A PMC engaged in combat during an armed conflict from intentionally concealing himself or herself as a non-combatant.

Based on your current definition, this prohibits, say, intelligence operatives, from engaging in combat, either as undercover operatives embedded in an enemy organization, investigators currently incognito who end up in a shootout, or other clandestine, but regrettably necessary, endeavors. (OOC: I have a hard time not imagining Archer in this bit.) That kind of ban would be unfortunate, as it would probably kill whatever support you may otherwise garner.

A PMC headquartered in or receiving a significant portion of its revenue from one member state from contracting with another member state that is opposed to the first in an armed conflict.

I struggle to see why this would be necessary? If a PMC decides to fight itself, deplete its own resources, and suffer from the obvious concern of becoming a security liability, why should the WA care?

A PMC to send a list of casualties sustained during an armed conflict at its cessation to the World Assembly PMC Committee.

Why? We aren't required to release such information of our regular soldiers, so why PMCs? Especially when, not unlike the dark recesses of our centralized intelligence agencies *ahem*, the battle records and casualty lists of some operations are to remain sealed permanently? Many PMCs are, afterall, utilized in the same clandestine nature as regular military units, especially in the ultra-capitalist nations here.

[Herzil]

I believe the Ambassador from Separatist People has addressed all the concerns we had with the latest draft.

As to the name change for the draft, you can try : "PMC Rules of Conduct"