China's Rise to Superpower: Navigating Global Dynamics.

Del H Khan & M A Hossain.

 As the intricate tapestry of global dynamics undergoes a profound reweaving, the ascendancy of China as a Superpower is prompting the United States and other global powers to respond with adaptability and grace. Amidst the interplay of competition and cooperation, global stability and the trajectory of the US-China relationship hang in the balance. China's awe-inspiring economic prowess, diplomatic finesse, ambitious military aspirations, remarkable technological capabilities, and deep-rooted historical wisdom converge to shape its influence on the world stage. To establish a harmonious world order, we must remain vigilant, fostering responsible behavior and nurturing equilibrium in our interdependent world.

Taiwan presents a delicate situation for the United States, given China's threats against its independence. While the US promises to defend Taiwan, it cautiously avoids taking a clear stance to avert direct confrontation with China. Supplying advanced weapons to Taiwan, the US keeps its commitment to military intervention ambiguous. An uncompromising stance and stubborn behavior of the Chinese Communist Party against democratic aspirants in Hong Kong has drawn condemnation from the US and the international community.  China has implemented a national security law, suppressing dissent and eroding the city's autonomy. 

China is flexing its military muscles in the South China Sea, which exhibits an act of power politics. By constructing artificial islands with military fortifications, China challenges neighboring nations' territorial claims and impacts freedom of navigation. The US and other countries stand against China's regional ambitions. Tibet remains a symbol of China's repression and resistance, as dissent is cracked down upon, denying the aspirations of Tibetan independence.

The clash of economic giants, the US and China, has unfolded in a devastating trade war of unprecedented scale, causing economic damage on both sides. Tariffs are used as weapons in this battle over intellectual property theft, market access, and trade imbalances. Negotiations falter, tensions rise, and the world yearns for a resolution to this high-stakes game of economic brinkmanship.

China's meteoric rise to superpower can be a meticulously orchestrated interplay of key factors, including economic reforms, education advancements, infrastructure development, market-oriented policies, foreign investments, and turning skilled workforce, that has propelled China to become the second-largest global economy. Education reforms have nurtured a highly educated population, fueling technological advancements. Massive investments in infrastructure have facilitated domestic economic growth and seamless trade operations.

Formulating an effective response to China's rise poses challenges for the United States, with divided attention and limited cooperation from allies. Striking a balance between competition and cooperation is crucial for global stability, addressing shared challenges and shaping the future of the US-China relationship.

China's economic prowess reshapes the world order, leveraging its historical heritage, innovation, and unwavering government support. Massive investments in infrastructure projects like the Belt and Road Initiative foster connectivity, create economic superhighways, and extend China's global economic engagement. Thriving urban centers have birthed a middle class with substantial purchasing power, driving China's economy and attracting international businesses. The modernization of China's economic system, with increased openness to foreign investors and a shift towards private players, creates a business-friendly environment fostering innovation and attracting international talent.

China's rise in diplomacy reflects its historical legacy and strategic approach to international relations. With a proactive and strategic stance, China actively participates in multilateral initiatives and negotiations, leaving a lasting impact on the global stage. Its involvement in crucial negotiations such as the Paris Agreement and Saudi-Iran talks showcases its commitment to addressing global challenges and leading towards a better future. China plays a vital role in promoting global harmony and addressing shared concerns through international conferences and initiatives. In the Asia-Pacific region, China's diplomatic finesse, leveraging historical territorial disputes, shapes the regional order and leaves an imprint on the evolving Asian landscape.

China's military strategy is complex and ambitious, making it hard to predict its long-term goals. However, rapid investments in advanced weaponry, cyber warfare capabilities, and a focus on the South China Sea signify their determination to secure strategic interests and compete globally with the United States. China's economic power is utilized to shape policies, build relationships, and expand influence. Through infrastructure investments and loans, China forges alliances that serve its long-term objectives and solidifies its position as a major player in global affairs. This multifaceted strategy, combining military modernization and economic prowess, demonstrates China's deliberate efforts to outmaneuver and outsmart the United States. This assertion on the world stage could reshape the global balance of power.  The world must prepare for the impact of China's military might and its ambitious global strategy.

China's technological triumphs are the result of strategic initiatives such as "Made in China 2025" and the cultivation of cyber warfare capabilities. Learning from past mistakes, China has avoided the pitfalls faced by the Soviet Union and controversies surrounding cyberattacks by the United States. Government investments have propelled China to the forefront of cutting-edge technologies like AI, robotics, and 5G. The "Thousand Talents" program attracts top talent, strengthening research and development capabilities. China's alleged involvement in cyber espionage and the strategic use of cyber warfare further demonstrate their application of historical insights to outmaneuver competitors. China is determined to lead the technological powerhouse of the 21st century, and the world must prepare for an era driven by China's historical wisdom and technological triumphs.

Furthermore, China's epic journey to becoming a superpower has been influenced by the wisdom of influential Chinese thinkers such as Sun Tzu, Deng Xiaoping, and Mao Zedong. Sun Tzu's principles of deception, surprise, and speed have shaped China's military strategies, including cyberattacks and disinformation campaigns. Deng Xiaoping's economic reforms, blending market-based economics with state control, transformed China into a global economic superpower. Mao Zedong advocated fiercely for Chinese nationalism, culture, and values, fostering a strong national identity and unity among the Chinese people.

As China continues its ascent, concerns and challenges emerge. The expansion of China's military capabilities raises eyebrows and sparks worries of potential conflicts. Additionally, concerns about China's human rights record add complexity to its global influence. China must navigate this complex landscape responsibly, maintaining its role as a responsible stakeholder in the international system.

Del H Khan is an author and global affairs analyst. He is the author of several award-winning and bestselling books.

M A Hossain is a political and defense analyst based in Bangladesh. 

This article published at :

1. The Policy Watcher (Exclusively):31July23

Kissinger's Recent Visit to China and Opening to China 2.0.

M A Hossain, 

On 19 July 2023, a momentous event that has captured the attention of the global community, former US Secretary of State, Henry Kissinger, embarked on a significant visit to China. This visit comes at a critical juncture in US China relations, with the transition from the Trump administration to the Biden administration. These tense relations between two superpowers disrupt the constructive dynamics and exacerbate the risk of global polarization and confrontation. As a seasoned diplomat and a key architect of the historic US -China rapprochement in the 1970s,Mr. Kissinger not only altered the historical trajectory of the two countries but also changed the course of global development. His visit to China carries immense significance and is seen as an attempt to reduce tensions between the US and China, reminiscent of his pioneering policy of 'détente'. It is evidence that recent initiative considering his historical contributions to promoting the development of US – China relations could be termed as 'opening to China 2.0'.

Historical background of US-China relations :

Henry Kissinger served as the US Secretary of State and national Security Advisor under President Richard Nixon and Gerald R Ford. Appointed as National Security Advisor in 1969 by the President Richard Nixon during the peak of the Cold War. The world was sharply divided into opposing ideologies, with the US championing capitalism and democracy, while the USSR championed communism. Under the Truman doctrine, the US's policy of 'containment' towards the USSR's allies, the US sought to prevent the spread of communism worldwide, even employing military force when deemed necessary. The island of Taiwan was administered by the Imperial Qing dynasty, but its control passed to the Japanese in 1895.  After Japan's defeat in World War ll, the Island came under the governance of China’s Nationalist Party, or also known as the Kuomintang. However, In 1949, the Cultural Revolution led by Mao Zedong forced Chiang Kai-Shek, the leader of the Kuomintang, to flee to Taiwan where he governed the island until his death in 1975.  China consistently claimed Taiwan as an integral part of its territory. However, after the Sino-Soviet split, which began in the early 1960s, the US saw the potential for China to become an ally. Nixon entrusted Kissinger with the mission to establish channels for diplomatic engagement.  After a thorough diplomatic maneuver by the Kissinger, in 1972 Nixon could able to visit China and that eventually let to the normalization of relations with China. The United States lifted restrictions on China, removed two destroyers from the Taiwan Strait, and ceased any support for Taiwan’s Independence, adhering to the one China policy. Before this breakthrough, China had been diplomatically isolated from most of the world. Since then, Kissinger has maintained engagement with the Chinese leadership and has continued to advocate for constructive dialogue between the two superpowers.

Present US-China relations :

The world is currently witnessing increasing tensions in various realms including trade dispute, technological competition, tariff impositions, and geopolitical maneuvering.  During the Trump Presidency, the US pursued a more aggressive foreign policy towards China.  The ties between the two countries had further spiraled downwards following then US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's trip to Taiwan. This led to Beijing cutting contacts with the US military communications.  Beijing has cited Washington's ' unilateral sanctions ' as an obstacle to resuming military- to- military dialogues. Additionally, the recent Russia -Ukraine conflict exposed the widening gap between US – China relations, where China is backing Russia staunchly. The relations were further deteriorated by the balloon incident at the beginning of this year.

Kissinger's visit & Beijing’s strategy to the US :

China is facing a bipartisan tough stance from both Republicans and Democrats in the US, and a US presidential election is approaching where candidates are likely to be more critical of China. In this context, Beijing is trying to influence and persuade US policy elites to reduce their strategic suppression of China.  Chairman Xi Jinping's meeting with Kissinger reflects a long term strategic move, valuing people to people relations, which are more important for China than official ones in its interaction with the US. It is evident that Beijing refused to let Mr. Li Shangfu meet his counterpart Lloyd Austin, but made an exception for Mr. Kissinger. While Mr. Xi met with American entrepreneur and philanthropist Bill Gates, US special envoy for climate John Kerry, Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen did not get face time with the President. Several American business leaders, including Mr. Musk, Mr. Tim Cook and Jamie Dimon, have been granted high -level meetings with Chinese officials that protocols are usually designed for foreign senior officials.  These visits by the business leaders offer China an opportunity to send a message domestically about foreign confidence in the economy. So the message is very clear that Beijing is open to meeting with the pro-China people who all are willing to speak out for China.

China’s political landscape :

Beijing's overtly warm reception of Mr. Kissinger, clearly signals its desire for friendlier engagement and less belligerence from the US. China seeks the US to lift restrictions on technology, adhere to the principles established in the Shanghai Communiqué, and understand the extreme significance of the one China policy, stop what Beijing perceives as a containment strategy centered on building security ties and partners around Asia. China welcomes the engagement in fair strategic competition of quantum computing, Artificial Intelligence, and semiconductors.  Through communication and dialogue, they can reach an immediate consensus on some security issues in certain areas. For example, they could build on a mechanism, like the Asia-Pacific Consultations initiated in 2011, led by China's Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the US State Department.

Though Mr. Kissinger has a controversial reputation in other parts of Asia for his role in systematic famine in Bangladesh and the Vietnam War.  He remains highly regarded in China for aiding the country’s re-engagement with the world. It is evident that any armed conflict between the US and China would not bring any meaningful result, but catastrophic consequences for the World. Therefore, Mr. Kissinger's visit could be seen as a gesture of goodwill from China and a possible implication of the policy 'opening to China 2.0'.

M A Hossain is a political and defense analyst based in Bangladesh. 

Email: writetomahossain@gmail.com

This article exclusively published at :

1. New Thinking, NY, USA : 30July23

The Weaponization of Food in Geo-political Conflict.

M A Hossain, 

Russia has suspended a critically important wartime deal aimed at transporting grains from Ukraine to various parts of the world across the Black Sea. The Kremlin has accused the West of its withdrawal from the deal due to unmet preconditions and demands. This development has reignited fears about global food security and dealt a blow to the global market. The agreement, brokered by Turkey and the United Nations(UN) in July of last year, represented a rare diplomatic breakthrough designed to avert a global food crisis when the global economy was already grappling with high inflation and the lingering effects of the Coronavirus pandemic. Now, Russia's withdrawal from this Accord disrupts the flow of food from Ukraine and also poses a risk to shipping safety in the North Western Black Sea. Undoubtedly, food is being weaponized in this geopolitical conflict.

Following Russia's all-out invasion of Ukraine and the blocking of its seaports in February 2022, Ukrainian grain exports through the Black Sea came to a halt. The agreement, known as the Black Sea Grain Initiative, was brokered by the UN and Turkey to alleviate a global food crisis. Under this agreement, Russia reopened three of Ukraine’s Back Seaports, ensuring the safety of grain shipping only. It also facilitated the movement of Russian produce despite Western sanctions. A joint coordination center comprising representatives from Russia, Ukraine, Turkey, and the UN was established to inspect ships ensuring they carry only food and monitor their movements. The deal covered three Ukrainian ports on the Black Sea coast-Odesa, Chernomorsk, and Pivdennyi (previously known as Yuzhny). Initially, the deal was set for 120 days and has since been renewed three times.

According to the Food and Agriculture Organization, global food prices, which skyrocketed soon after the Russian invasion, began to ease in the months following the agreement. Both countries are major suppliers of wheat, barley, sunflower oil, and other affordable food products on which Africa, the Middle East, and parts of Asia rely. Ukraine is also a significant exporter of corn and Russian fertilizer. Once the grain deal was established, the World Food Program got a supply of 725,000 metric tons of humanitarian food aid from Ukraine, benefiting countries on the brink of famine, including Ethiopia, Afghanistan, Somalia, and Yemen.  The grain deal allowed Ukraine to export nearly 33 million commodities. However, the Kremlin's recent move now jeopardized a vital route for Ukrainian grain to reach global markets. According to the International Rescue Committee report, the grain deal served as a lifeline for the 79 countries and 349 million people facing food insecurity.

Moscow has been dissatisfied with the deal since its Inception, claiming that it failed to deliver on its promise to free up Russian agricultural exports that have been blocked by Western sanctions. Although food and fertilizer are not directly subject to sections, but restrictions on banking, transit, and insurance indirectly made trade unviable. To renew the grain deal, Russia demanded the reconnection of the state-owned Russian Agricultural Bank to the international SWIFT messaging service that is critical for cross-border payment. Additionally, Russia insisted on lifting restrictions on maritime insurance and on the supply of spare parts used in agricultural machinery, ending sanctions against fertilizer companies and individuals linked to them, and restoring an ammonia pipeline that crosses Ukraine. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan played a pivotal role in the agreement, but the ties between these two countries have come under strain following Ankara's recent pro-Western moves.

Ukraine’s economy heavily relies on agriculture, and 75% of its grain exports pass through the Black Sea corridor. It can also export a smaller amount of grain by land or through the Danube River to neighboring Romania's Black Sea port. However, these routes have limited capacity compared to sea shipments. Now, with the demise of the deal, Ukraine will be forced to export most of its grains and oil seeds through its land border and Danube ports. This will pile tremendous pressure on Ukrainian farmers' profits and could prompt them to plant less in the coming season. Consequently, Africa and the Middle East are likely to become more dependent on Russian food grains, especially wheat. Russia is now the top wheat supplier, exported a record 45.5 million metric tons in the 2022-23 trade year, and is expected all-time high of 47.5 million metric tons in the 2023–24 trade year.

Aid groups and the West called on Russia to reverse the move. UN chief António Guterres stated that the decision would strike a blow to the people in need everywhere.  As per the International Rescue Committee, approximately 80% of East Africa's grain is imported from Russia and Ukraine. Therefore, the disruption of the food supply could have devastating consequences.  After Russia exited the deal, wheat prices in Chicago trading rose about 3% on the day. The prices of wheat, corn, and soybean in the markets surged, potentially triggering a fresh bout of destabilizing global food inflation shortly. According to the UN report, the Black Sea Initiative helped ease a global food crisis, reducing food prices by over 23% since March 2022. It also reported that before the deal, the Ukraine crisis made 783 million people to face chronic hunger in 2022.

The weaponizations of food in the geo-political conflict, exemplified by the Russia-Ukraine grain deal suspension, threatens global food security. This move has the potential to disrupt Ukraine's economy and impact a region reliant on Ukrainian exports. The West would also face food inflation and potential market destabilization. It is evident that Russia's actions reflect a Cold War mentality. The West also must restrain the monopoly of their dollar system and foster cooperation to mitigate conflict-driven consequences on global food security.

M A Hossain is a political and defense analyst based in Bangladesh. 

Email : writetomahossain@gmail.com

This article published at :

1. The Asian Age, BD:24July23

2. The New Nation, BD :24July23

Cluster Munitions in the Russia-Ukraine Conflict: A Controversial Dance of Destruction.

M A Hossain, 

The conflict between Russia and Ukraine has reached a critical juncture, as the Biden administration announced its inclusion of cluster bombs in the United States next $800 million weapons package for Ukraine. The Pentagon is contemplating the use of cluster munitions as a strategic maneuver. Particularly after the destruction of Kakhovka dam, Ukraine has been slow to achieve it goal of a counteroffensive against Russian forces or their mercenaries. Kyiv has been increasingly desperate for more weaponry, including controversial cluster bombs from its allies.  According to the Human Rights Watch, both Russia and Ukraine have been accused of using cluster bombs in several times, resulting civilian casualties.  The international communities have expressed their deep concerns regarding the deployment of unconventional cluster munitions in Ukraine.

Cluster bombs are infamous weapons that release multiple smaller submunitions over a wide area. These submunitions, known as bomblets, are dispersed from the main munition and scatter across the target zone. The weapons, which can be delivered via artillery, Rockets, bombs, and missiles. Upon detonation in the air above the target area, they disperse lethal fragments, causing extensive damage and casualties. These submunitions or bomblets are designed to explode either upon impact or with a delayed detonation mechanism. Cluster munitions are widely considered as among the most harmful weapons to civilians or other unintended targets, especially children, as they disperse bomblets indiscriminately across the wide area and often fail to explode upon initial impact. This leaves behind duds that act like land mines, posing a long-lasting threat to civilians even after a conflict ends. These weapons are typically used against enemy concentrations, armored vehicles and infrastructure targets. 

Cluster bombs can have a significant impact on the battlefield by saturating a large area with explosive submunitions, leading to widespread destruction and demoralizing enemy forces. The high density of bomblets creates a battle shock among the enemy forces and can destroy armored vehicles and fortified trenches. It also disrupts enemy logistics by damaging infrastructures, supply line, and communication networks. Cluster bombs are very effective against entrenched defensive positions, artillery position, and air defense systems. The unexploded submunitions act as scattering random booby traps across the battlefield. While cluster munitions may provide additional military value in certain limited situations, they are not a magical winning weapon for overall warfare.

Despite their immediate military advantages, cluster munitions pose long-term risk.  Unexploded bomblets can remain dormant and hazards for civilians long after the conflict ends. These unexploded submunitions can be triggered easily by unsuspecting individuals, including children, resulting in severe injuries or fatalities. The substantial environmental impact such as contamination of agricultural land and water sources poses a severe threat to the ecosystem. The humanitarian impact of cluster bombs extends far beyond the duration of the conflict itself.  According to a 2019 report by Royal United Services Institute(RUSI) has revealed that 97% of casualties from cluster bombs worldwide were accounted for by civilians and among them the children accounting for 66% of the casualties.  

The utilization of cluster mutations carries a contentious historical background. They were extensively used during World War ll. The United States has used these weapons in various prior conflicts, including Southeast Asia in the 1960s and 1970s and Iraq in 2003, and engagements in the Persian Gulf War, Lebanon, Afghanistan, and Syria. Saudi Arabia employed US-supplied cluster munitions in Yemen in 2009. In the ongoing Russia -Ukraine conflict, both Russian and the Ukrainian armed forces have not denied credible evidence of their use of cluster munitions. In 2008, more than 100 nations signed the convention on cluster munitions, an international treaty that came into effect in 2010, prohibiting the use, production, transfer, and stockpiling of the deadly weapons.  Only 16 countries, including the US, Ukraine, Russia, have so far refused to sign the convention. 

The decision to employ cluster munitions in the Russia -Ukraine conflict carries a significant consequence.  While these munitions may provide tactical advantages, the potential long-term damage to noncombatants and the undermining of the international humanitarian law cannot be ignored. Mr. Biden is facing obstacles from members of his own and opposition parties in the Caucasus  to deliver this lethal weapon to Ukraine, but will ultimately be able to bypass those obstacles under his presidential power. It would escalate tensions, hinder future negotiations, and perpetuate extreme destruction. From the tactical perspective, the use of cluster munitions by Ukraine may gain time to replenish arms and ammunition, to break through multi-layered Russian defense or bring halt the advance of Russian troops or their mercenaries. It would also engage extra forces to rebuild or clear occupied territories by Russia. However, it is crucial to acknowledge that this may potentially trigger a limited scale of nuclear attacks. 

The historical usage of cluster bombs in previous conflicts has demonstrated the devastating and enduring impact on affected communities.  Ukraine's decision to use this unconventional weapon is deeply troubling and raises serious ethical, legal, and humanitarian concerns. It is imperative for the international communities, Human Rights organizations, and other influential nations to come together to condemn this saber-rattling and exert diplomatic pressure on the sponsoring nation to oppose any transfer or use of cluster munitions. 

M A Hossain is a political and defense analyst based in Bangladesh. 

Email : writetomahossain@gmail.com

This article published at :

1. The New Nation, BD:12 July 23

2. The Daily Asian Age, BD:12 July 23

Private Army: A Complex Challenge to Global Security.

 Del H Khan & M A Hossain, 

This is not merely a hypothetical scenario, but an undeniable reality wherein conflicts and wars are fought not by conventional armies but by private armies and military contractors. Private armies, also known as Private Military and Security Companies (PMSCs), are becoming a controversial topic that remains at the forefront of global security discussions. The utilization of PMSCs in conflict situations presents a multifaceted and contentious issue.  While their involvement can at times yield positive result, the potential for human rights abuses and abuses of power, coupled with lack of accountability, necessitates careful regulation and oversight. 

The Sacred Band of Thebes is believed to be the oldest private army in the history, having been formed in Ancient Greece around the 4th century BC.  Private armies have been associated with various religion throughout history. In Hinduism, the private army of Maratha was one of the most prominent military forces in India.  The Maratha army played a crucial role in expanding the Maratha Empire and was renowned for their mobility and flexibility in battle.  During the Ottoman Empire, the Janissaries were a private army composed of elite soldiers who were recruited from Christian boys. They were fiercely loyal to the Sultan and played a crucial role in Ottoman military campaigns.  In Christianity, the Knight Templar were a private military order established in the 12th century during the Crusades.  For centuries, the Swiss Guards, establishment in 1506 by Pope Julius ll, have stood as a renowned private army for protecting the Pope and Vatican City. Another formidable private army was the French Foreign Legion, which was established in 1831.  This mercenary force was composed of soldiers from various countries and was often deployed to conflicts around the world. However, the history of private armies dates back to ancient time, when wealthy individuals frequently hired mercenaries to augment their armies or even lead them into battle. 

Private armies have become a global phenomenon, often resulting in devastating consequences for regional stability, human rights, and international law. In South Africa, a PMC known as Executive Outcomes (EO) was hired by the government of Angola and Sierra Leone in the 1990s to fight against rebel groups, while EO was credited with restoring peace and stability, but also faced criticism for human rights abuse, economic interests, and lack of accountability. Sandline International (SI), a British PMC, was contracted by ousted President Kabbalah of Sierra Leone in 1997 to overthrow the military Junta.  But, SI's involvement sparked diplomatic scandals.  In the Middle East, American PMC Black Water (later named Academi) was contracted by the US government to provide security services in the Iraq after the 2003 invasion. Nevertheless, Black Water became infamous for its involvement in various unethical gross misconducts, specially Nisour Square massacre in 2007. After Black Water's contract was terminated, the American government hired Triple Canopy (TC). But, they too faced allegations of fraud, corruption, and misconduct. TC also operated in other countries such as Honduras, Haiti and Peru, where it faced accusations of human rights abuse, environmental damage and interference with local affairs.

In Latin America, the right-wing paramilitary group United Self defense Force of Colombia (AUC) was formed by landlords, drug lords and former military officers to combat leftist guerrillas such as FARC. The Russian PMC Wagner Group (WG) has been accused of participating in several conflicts on behalf of Russia in Syria, Libya, Sudan, Central African Republic, and Venezuela. It has also been implicated in human rights violations, war crimes and covert operations. In European Union, Wagner Group and RSB Group have gained notoriety for their involvement in conflicts in Syria and Ukraine respectively. In Australia and Oceania, the private military industry is relatively small, with firms like Aegis Defense Services and G4S.  Asia is dominated by firms like Academi and Aegis Defense Services.

While, private armies are criticized for their lack of accountability, especially in areas where there is limited government control. Their activities often violate International and local laws. The most significant concern is that they undermine the monopoly of legitimate violence held by States.  This can erode a state's sovereignty and authority and can sometimes even act against the interest of the host government or local populations, ultimately leading to instability and conflicts.  Moreover, they typically operate under complex contractual arrangements, which obscure their identities, responsibilities, and liabilities. Currently, there is no effective International enforcement mechanism that can monitor, investigate, or sanction private armies for violations or abuses.

The private armies differ from other armed actors such as militia, rebels, and terrorists in several key aspects. These PMCs are motivated by profit rather than political or ideological objectives. They operate independently and are controlled by the objectives set by their clients. The PMCs have a distinct operational scope, size, and capabilities that differentiate them from a local or International security services providers.  Private armies mainly operate in conflict zone or high-risk areas, and also provide protection to Infrastructures, convoy, or governments and private clients. In contrast, security service providers offer services, like security consulting, risk assessment and training.

It is crucial to develop a legally binding of international convention on PMCs that defines their status, rules, responsibilities, and objectives under international law. To regulate or control private armies, states must review and revise existing law to establish clear criteria and procedure for licensing or registering PMCs operating within their territory or abroad. Oversight of PMCs should be established through a clear legal framework, licensing system, vetting procedure, contracting standards, monitoring mechanism, and complaint procedures.

The diversification of clients and missions poses a challenging for private armies to balance their profit motives with their professional ethics while maintaining their reputation and credibility in a competitive market. It is imperative for policy-makers, International organizations, and civil society groups to collaborate in developing best practices and effective regulations that strike a balance between the need for security and respect for human rights and accountability.  This approach would ensure that private armies operate within ethical and legal frameworks, making a positive contribution to International security.

This article published at :

1. The New Thinking, NY, USA :11Jul23