The wrongs of mercenarism: A promissory account

Abstract

Speaker: Chiara Cordelli, University of Exeter Departing from both those who condemn mercenarism on motivational grounds and those who justify it on instrumental grounds, I argue that the state outsourcing of military tasks to private parties consists of a system of contracts that contain either invalid or seriously problematic promises. Therefore, either the mercenary acquires no promissory duty to perform, or, if they do acquire it, they should be released immediately. Further, insofar as the mercenary comes to acquire a permission to use force on behalf of the state only as a necessary means to discharge their promissory duty to fight on its behalf, if the promise misfires the mercenary does not acquire any such permission either. Two implications follow. On the one hand, any attempt on the part of the state to compel the mercenary to perform constitutes an arbitrary interference with the latter’s freedom. On the other hand, any attempt on the part of the mercenary to exercise force on behalf of the state subject others to a merely unilateral use of force. Hence the privatization of war constitutes a condition of double domination.