Last Thursday, an event was held in the State Duma about which no information appeared on the official website of the Russian parliament. Here, in the format of a round table, a discussion of the draft law "On private military security activities" was held. In December, it was introduced to the State Duma by Gennady Nosovko, a deputy from the Just Russia faction. Now the deputies, experts interested in the person's law have joined in the discussion of the norms contained in this draft.
Lobbyists of private military companies went on the fifth attempt
The State Duma apparatus apparently considered the event not worthy of public attention, therefore information about the discussion of the bill appeared only on the official website of the Spravorossi. This attitude of the Duma members to the new initiative of Deputy Nosovko is explained by the fact that this is already the fifth attempt to legalize private military companies (PMCs) in Russia. The first four failed at the stage of the so-called zero read.
According to experts, the failure of the draft laws is largely due to the fact that the topic of private military companies in the eyes of the public is directly associated with mercenary military activities. Many deservedly consider it unacceptable. The Russian Criminal Code even contains Article 359 "Mercenary". It provides for punishment (imprisonment for a term of four to eight years) for the recruitment, training, financing or material support of a mercenary. Illegal military activity will be punished no less severely.
There is nothing to be surprised at. In the Russian mentality, mercenaries have always been a threat to peace and humanity. At best, they were called "wild geese", and by no means "soldiers of fortune", as they formed the image of this public in Western countries.
It all began in the sixties of the last century, when British Colonel David Stirling created the first private military company Watchguard International (WI). She worked for the allied British governments and international organizations, carried out "delicate operations", the participation of the military personnel of the state itself could entail undesirable political or economic consequences.
David Stirling created several private military companies. For example, there was also Kilo Alpha Service. She contracted the WWF to fight poachers in South Africa. Along the way, she trained the armies of the warring political forces (ANC and Inkata). As they say, nothing personal - just business.
This business has grown across countries and continents and has practically become legal. According to experts, already in the 90s, PMCs trained troops in 42 countries and took part in more than 700 conflicts. In the new century, the account of private military armies exceeded a hundred. They say that they already have more than a million (some authors cite the figure as five million) employees, and the business turnover has exceeded 350 billion US dollars.
The Economist magazine cites a more modest figure - over $ 100 billion. However, even the restrained assessment of British economists puts PMCs' incomes above the gross domestic product of dozens of states - about 60th in the world economic ranking. For example, higher than those close to us Azerbaijan, Belarus, other post-Soviet countries (in this list, only Kazakhstan and Ukraine have better indicators than PMCs).
Hence the interest of Russian business in private military activities. According to observers, it is lobbied by retired generals and oligarchs. Their efforts did not give any meaningful result. Initially, having directly stated in the draft law "On private military security companies" the goals of creating PMCs, they faced legal casuistry - in the Civil Code of Russia, legal entities are classified as commercial and non-commercial organizations, but not companies. I had to adjust. There were options "On state regulation of the creation and activities of private military companies", "On amendments to certain legislative acts of the Russian Federation." But they also found inconsistency with the norms of Russian legislation.
High government officials were involved in the topic. In 2012, at a visiting meeting in Tula of the Military-Industrial Commission (MIC), Deputy Prime Minister of the Russian government Dmitry Rogozin said (I quote from RIA Novosti): “Today we are considering the issue of forming an interdepartmental working group at the military-industrial complex on the problem of creating private military companies in Russia … The task of the group will be to prepare (taking into account the monitoring of private business initiatives in the field of security defense, as well as the state of the main trends in the world market for private services) proposals for the feasibility of creating private military companies in Russia."
Dmitry Rogozin will return to this topic more than once. But lawmakers will support him only in 2014. This will be done by the LDPR faction of the Pskov Regional Assembly of Deputies. She will develop a project "On private military companies". Franz Klintsevich, who was then deputy chairman of the Duma Defense Committee, actively protested, they say, this is not the competence of regional deputies, the bill should be developed by the Ministry of Defense and the State Duma deputies.
In the fall of 2014, a new version of the draft law on PMCs was presented by Gennady Nosovko, a spravorass deputy already mentioned here. The idea once again turned out to be unpromising and did not even reach the first reading.
PMCs to protect national interests?
Now on the table of Duma members is a new version of the law, which is designed to legally regulate the activities of private military companies in the Russian legal field. After all, now it is prohibited in our country. Few PMCs operate under the law "On private detective and security activities in the Russian Federation." However, it seriously limits the opportunities and appetites of companies.
Opening the discussion, Deputy Gennady Nosovko said: “The previous version of the bill did not find understanding and support, so my colleagues and I set about revising it. Now it has turned out to be practically a new bill”.
The discussion in the Duma showed that the Russian mentality has not changed over the year. Experts believe that the state will no longer transfer powers in the field of defense and security into the hands of private structures. This is how the editor-in-chief of the National Defense magazine Igor Korotchenko told the NSN agency: “If such organizations were needed, they would have already been created. From the point of view of performing functions related to defense, security, training of military personnel, all these issues remain under the jurisdiction of the state. There will be no delegation of authority in this area to anyone."
Igor Korotchenko allowed the use of PMCs abroad, but for strictly limited tasks. “They would be appropriate for protecting the areas of gas and oil production of those large Russian companies that operate abroad. To ensure, for example, the protection of ships when passing in those areas where sea pirates are operating. Vladimir Putin expressed a similar opinion when he was prime minister.
Business representatives see their goals a little differently. For example, Oleg Krinitsyn, the general director of LLC RSB-Group (positioning itself as a private military consulting company), who spoke during the discussion of the bill, said that the main meaning of the new law should be to regulate PMCs as a “subtle instrument of the state for use in those regions, where it is not always advisable to use regular troops. (Hello British Colonel Stirling!)
Oleg Krinitsyn was supported by State Duma Deputy Maxim Shingarkin: “We all understand what lies at the heart of such a law, and we must honestly say that if we set the task of legitimizing the actions of citizens of the Russian Federation on the territory of third countries, including in conditions of hostilities, then we must, by this or another law, provide for the right of citizens of the Russian Federation to carry out such actions in the interests of protecting themselves, their loved ones, the interests of third parties, including in the absence of any organized process in the form of military security organizations."
The idea of Deputy Shingarkin, albeit not expressed very competently and elegantly, was developed by one of the developers of the bill, an expert of the Duma Security Committee Valery Shestakov. He sees the commercial activities of PMCs (Shestakov emphasized the word "commercial"), aimed "at implementing the plans of the Russian state to protect its national interests." That's it - no more and no less.
All these tossing between commercial interests and national interests indicate that the drafters of the law today are closer to the appetites of business than to public goals. Attempts, as one witty put it, to make "wild geese" domestic, only indicate that legislators still do not have an understanding of what is the public demand for PMCs? And is he there? This was reflected even in the details of the bill. In particular, the licensing of PMCs is supposed to be transferred in some cases to the Ministry of Industry and Trade, in others to the Ministry of Defense, and in others to the FSB. The range ranges from routine trade in services to state secrets and military planning. The customers of the alleged services of private military companies are just as vaguely spelled out in the text. It is not surprising that the discussion of the bill has given rise to more controversy than consent, and the prospects for its reading in the Duma have become rather dim.
Meanwhile, the number of private military companies in the world is multiplying. Experts attribute this to the growing independence of private capital. Others speak even more precisely - about forceful support of the goals of transnational corporations. Is there a need for such support from Russian business? It seems that without a clear answer to this question, one can hardly count on serious commercial prospects for Russian PMCs and legislative support for their activities …
