Home »

[bana2166]

South Africa 'mercenaries' are 'highly prized' at private security companies contracted to do work in international hotspots.

Wendell Roelf

Tue, 23 May 2006

Removing South Africans employed at private security companies contracted to do work in international hotspots could prove "disastrous", members of Parliament heard on Tuesday.

"Many international efforts will be at risk... (Some) will have to close their operations if they can't rely on South Africans," said Doug Brooks, president of the International Peace Operations Association.

Brooks was briefing Parliament's defence portfolio committee on the second day of submissions on South Africa's draft anti-mercenary bill.

Also speaking on behalf of the Private Security Company Association of Iraq, Brooks said South Africa currently set the ethical standards for peace-keeping operations, providing more personnel (2000) than for example, America.

"South Africans are more robust, able to live under more austere conditions, have increased flexibility and can adapt to changing conditions," Brooks told Sapa of the reasons why South Africans were so highly regarded.

He said the proposed legislation would undermine peace-keeping operations, from Darfur in Sudan to Haiti and Iraq, because the "costs of peace" would increase significantly.

Brooks said private security companies were vital to the reconstruction of countries such as Iraq, and generally catered for three general categories ? logistics and support, private security companies hired "to protect the noun" and reform and development companies which supported long-term change.

23 South Africans killed in Iraq

An estimated 800 South Africans were presently employed at private security companies in Iraq, with more involved in logistics and de-mining operations.

The department of foreign affairs said that a total of 23 South Africans had been killed in Iraq while providing security-related services.

Brooks said the peace and stability industry was critical to international operations, and supported efforts to enhance transparency and accountability.

He said there was a concern in industry that the anti-mercenary bill was counter-productive and ran contrary to democratic ideals.

Quoting from the United Nation's special rapporteur on mercenaries, Dr Shaista Shameem, Brooks said that companies not engaged in violations of human rights and impeding the right of people's to self-determination were "not a problem".

He said the UN itself made use of the private sector to provide security of UN operations, as well as logistics and support in areas such as refugee camps.

Poorer countries best at peace-keeping

Brooks said it seemed as if the worlds' poorest countries were trying to deal with the most difficult peace-keeping operations imaginable, and a key point was that the "West is abrogating its responsibility to support these operations".

Asked by committee members about violations and the monitoring thereof, Brooks said the association had a code of conduct and tried to be proactive, but conceded this was limited.

"We don't have a secret ninja team that can go and whack violators."

Brooks said the worst the trade association could do was debar errant private companies, adding: "We can't shoot them, that's the job of states."

He said a complaint emanating from companies working in Iraq was that there was insufficient oversight of their work, which could impact on future contracts.

Brooks said in discussions with South Africans on the ground in troubled areas, the concerns raised in relation to the bill was that it would be interpreted too broadly and "will make criminals of them".

Brooks supported a system which allowed serving members of the South African National Defence Force to apply for leave, serve overseas in a private company, and return to the SANDF.

However, committee chair, Thandi Tobias, questioned this, saying that this was not okay and needed to be controlled.