Private profit and public purpose are not inevitably at odds, but there can never be any doubt as to which has primacy. Perhaps our public interests can only be met by the judicious resort to private power, but there is a pressing need for transparency and clear thinking about this. It has been argued that the private security companies can be 'regulated' in the public interest, a point well made by David Shearer in his article on mercenaries in the Fall 1998 issue of Foreign Policy . The history of regulation, however, bears frequent witness to how eventually the regulators have served the interests of the regulated. Only transparency and understanding can prevent this, not only in the public interest, but also in the interest of the investors who make up private companies, particularly those involved in resource development in Africa, where mercenaries have been so much in the news.
Investment requires focused energy and resources.
It would be helpful to the companies involved if they were not engaged in a constant struggle, a trial of allegation and retraction. This situation stems from the fact that too often, public security is not available to those on the ground, be they companies, development NGOs or the people of the region. Use is made of available help. Transparency, yes, and understanding through research and disclosure, but also necessary is the return of public purpose and public security, in short, a culture of Human Security, in which all of us have an interest, and which the UN has a duty to promote. Demonizing the private security companies or their critics is neither necessary nor sufficient, and cannot be allowed to remove from us all the burden of contributing to Human Security for ourselves and our neighbours.