on al jazeera. sohail: as russia recovers from what it calls wagner's rebellion, there is a new focus on private armies. they are used in many conflicts around the world, but how much of a threat are they to the global order, and can they be stopped? this is "inside story." ♪ hello. welcome to the program. i'm sohail rahman. the mutiny by russia's wagner mercenary group has shined a light on the shadowy world of private armies.

the operate in conflict zones around the world. their services have been employed by governments, anti-piracy operations, and even by some ngo's. but what are the risks of these soldiers for hire, and how much of a threat are they to the international order and international peace? and what role will they play in the future? we will put those questions and more to our guests in just a few moments, but first, this report. reporter: the wagner mercenary group, once in lockstep with russian president vladimir putin, and now, an existential threat. >> we will protect our people and our statehood from any threats, including internal betrayal, and what we are facing is betrayal. exorbitant ambitions and personal interests led to treason. reporter: tens of thousands of fighters loyal not to the kremlin, but to yevgeny prigozhin. he's grown his private military force into a global power, active not just in ukraine, but across africa. wagner has worked for

governments and militaries in central african republic, libya, mali, and sudan fighting rebel groups. prigozhin has also reported political and military influence in chad, mozambique, and zimbabwe. the sheer scale of wagner's operations has exposed the risks of private armies, and wagner is just one of many. recent years have seen major mercenary activity in yemen, nigeria, ukraine, syria, and iraq, among other places. there's been debate about what laws govern private armies, and if they can be held to account when their fighters commit crimes. no one knows how much the industry is worth, but business is booming. one of the most advanced and best known mercenary groups is the american firm academy, formerly known as blackwater. it played a substantial role in both iraq and afghanistan for the u.s. government. while u.k.-based contractors at one time was responsible for

providing nearly one third of all nonmilitary convoys in iraq. today, the group is present in more than 125 countries. companies like these are operating on nearly every continent, and provide tens of thousands of highly trained fighters for hire. but it's not only governments who are paying for their services. multinational corporations are the biggest new clients. they are using mercenaries to protect their investments, especially mining sites and shipping routes. even ngo's including save the children and world vision have turned to guns for hire to protect their operations in dangerous regions. and with conflict on the rise worldwide, it looks likely that private military companies are here to stay. sohail: let's bring in our guests now. in honolulu, hawaii, sean mcfate, former military contractor and author of the modern mercenary.

in copenhagen, sorcha macleod, a member of the u.n. working group on the use of mercenaries. and in washington, d.c., john lechner, a wagner group expert with focus on conflict in africa. a warm welcome to all of our guests on "inside story." a lot of bases to hit on this particular program. let's just begin with the facts. sean, if i can come to you first. recent events seem to show that mercenaries can be more dangerous and more lethal militarily and politically than one might imagine. a bit of a wake-up call, isn't it, to world leaders? sean: it is. and it certainly shows the risks of relying on private force to do your bidding, especially en mass, like the wagner group. but we cannot forget that mercenaries are the second oldest profession. they are very hard to control. they can be very fickle. what we saw over the past weekend is not new in history.

the problem also is that world leaders up to a point have generally seen mercenaries as cheap hollywood villains, and that is not true. they are very dangerous. sohail: john lechner, can i get your opinion on this? because as sean just mentioned, historically, we can go back to what william the conqueror in the 11th century, using hired swords to combat and make conquest of england and start the british monarchy. i have a whole list here as well, from syria to italy, even the pope using mercenaries. what is your general opinion of what we have seen over the last 48 hours? and it is a continuing story about what is going on in, dare i say, outside of russia. john: yes, i would agree with sean mcfate, that the use of mercenaries and their role in conflict is nothing new. it has really been only in the

past 200 years or so that we have seen the development of national standing armies. and i think as mr. mcfate has pointed out in his own book, the world is beginning to revert and change again to the privatization of security in warfare. i think specifically what it means for governments, especially within russia at the moment, is yes, mercenary groups can both work for the state and are driven for profit, and they can be an incredibly useful tool, but a dangerous tool at the same time if they are not satisfied with a particular outcome. sohail: sorcha, we will talk about the legality of what is going on globally in a moment, but in terms of mercenaries, it is a fickle business, really. pay the right price, you buy the right men and guns, they are yours, but it will come back to bite you in the posterior if you have not paid enough. and this is what seems to be developing, or has been a historical scenario for quite some time.

sorcha: i think what we have seen at the weekend is the consequences of the unregulated privatization of the use of force. machiavelli wrote many centuries ago that mercenaries are dangerous, they are unreliable, you cannot trust them. and i think that is very much what we have seen here. but over and above that, they are hugely problematic for civilian populations. that's not to say that other armed forces or other nonstate actors are not dangerous as well. but when mercenaries are involved in an armed conflict, what we see is that the levels of violence against civilian populations rises substantially. they prolong the conflict. we have seen with their involvement in libya, they have

undermined the peace process, and they destabilize whole regions. sohail: sean, can i come in there, you were shaking your head there. is there something you want to say? sean: yeah. history often shows that mercenaries can be deeply dishonest, but so can their clients. the popes who hired mercenary armies were infamous for not paying them. when i worked in africa, nobody wanted to work with the u.n. because they did not think they would get paid. so it is not just mercenaries ripping off their clients, it is also clients ripping off their mercenaries. but i agree with sorcha. there is a saying in africa that when the elephants fight, the grass gets trampled. and civilians are the grass. and this is an element of private warfare that is deeply problematic. sohail: i want to come back to john lechner. just a little bit more focus on what is going on in russia as we move onto the much wider picture. prigozhin now, where does he

stand right now? he's perhaps on his way to belarus. does he have any leverage, does wagner have any leverage now with moscow? and what is the state of play with those mercenaries of his company? john: sure. i mean, to say anything with certainty right now, i think we need to have a degree of humility as we try to predict where prigozhin is sitting at the moment. we do not know if he is in belarus at the moment. one of the things i have been looking for is whether or not we would see any shakeup within the ministry of defense, as these were prigozhin's main rivals within the russian government and essentially the figures he was trying to oust.

and thus far, we saw one of them receive a medal, so it seems like he is not going anywhere. so essentially the question now remains whether or not prigozhin himself is able to retain control over the group. i think at the end of the day, regardless of a change in management, that wagner, over the course of several years, has built significant infrastructure in africa. not only physical infrastructure but something i think is even more important, which is just contacts and networks and relationships. so, like any ceo who comes into a new company, you cannot fire 2000 people and expect to bring in 2000 who could get the thing running again perfectly. sohail: sorcha, i suppose watching what is going on and analyzing what is going on from the sidelines out of these areas of conflict does really make you think about tackling the issue of mercenaries and how to, as you say, not just legalize it, but control it, if it can be.

it seems that the largest number of mercenaries are ex-military personnel themselves that have not found their place in society after they have left the forces, and they are a gun for hire. so, is it not a combination of trying to tackle the problem at the source, which is what do you do with ex-military, or ex-military trained personnel looking for a career after they have left the forces? sorcha: certainly that has been the traditional profile of mercenaries. and we have to be very specific about the language we are using here. you mentioned you would come back to me on the legality of the situation here. so, what we have to understand is that mercenary has a specific international legal definition. it is a very difficult definition to meet, and it's essentially, if i can summarize it, is somebody who has been recruited specifically to participate in an armed conflict, and that they did directly participate in an armed conflict.

that is where we get into difficulties. different states take different views about what it means to directly participate in a hostility. so you will see some that will say, you mentioned some american companies earlier, for example, and you put them under the mercenary label. others would say, and america would say they are not mercenaries, they did not directly participate in hostilities, they were not actually fighting. so we need to be really careful about the language that we use here, because there are specific -- there is a specific regulatory framework that does, in fact, criminalize the recruitment, training, financing, and the use of mercenaries. but to come back to your point about who mercenaries are, the working group is about to finalize a report on recruitment practices. because while, yes, the traditional profile of a mercenary is somebody who was

ex-military personnel, retired military person who has been trained and has combat experience -- of course that is why they are used and sought after as mercenaries. one of the problems that we have seen in recent years is a phenomenon we call predatory recruitment. where we're seeing people who are being taken advantage of because they come from a conflict-affected country. for example, syria we have seen this happen. and where they are being, in some cases, coerced or put under pressures to become mercenaries, or they are actually fraudulently recruited as mercenaries and promised nationality and large sums of money, which never materialize. we have also seen in the russian context very recently where individuals were recruited from prisons to fight for the wagner group in ukraine.

and while some of them did in fact volunteer to do that, still others were pressurized, or put under duress to become mercenaries. and so, there's a whole new layer of problem there, that these people are themselves becoming victims. sohail: there are layers, and you have totally sorted it out. it is very difficult, the terminology, but for the sake of the time we have, obviously we are going to use mercenaries as a generic term. sean, can i come back to you, because sorcha did mention syria. the rewards for mercenaries are large. and with a conflict, salaries can be several fold more than perhaps you would get on the domestic market. the way that armed mercenaries, if we can just use that term for now, are used is different in

different contexts, if we look at syria for example, we know that mercenaries were used to get rid of isil and to protect oil reserves. and in doing so, the mercenaries have a loyalty to a certain state or a country, find that companies from that state or country actually get contracts. there is a subliminal aim here, isn't there? sean: yes. there is a quid pro quo. i think looking at the extractive industry and mercenary development, there is a twin story to be seen here. not all extractive industries of course, but prigozhin's own model is, he's in mali, he's in syria, he's doing mines. what happens is he goes to a government like mali, he will say, look, i can coup-proof you. i have the wagner group, and i also have the internet research agency, the troll factor which he also owns to do disinformation, cyber. and in exchange, i want a mine

for gold, or oil, or whatnot. and we have seen this model work for him across syria and across africa. and if he wanted to, he could keep that maybe moving. but as one of my colleagues just said, it is really hard to get inside the minds of putin and prigozhin. but yes, there is something to be said about wealth, money, and firepower. sohail: yeah, the quid pro quo thing is interesting. because john, it's sometimes even simpler than that, isn't it? for example, in nigeria, under the radar, the authorities there, so we believe, also brought in mercenaries to try and push out boko haram. what was your understanding of what was going on there? john: just to go back to one thing that mr. mcfate said which was interesting is that it is a model, the kind of exchange of security provision for concession rights to natural resources.

but even that is also not a model that is unique to wagner. often for african governments, there is a correlation but not necessarily a causation that in places where there are natural resources, there are conflicts, and governments of those countries tend to be cash-strapped, they don't have a lot of cash on hand. so for them, the easier thing to do as well to take advantage is to give away concessions that they do not necessarily control and they don't have to give away any cash out of pocket. and so, these deals also do work to the interest of the african governments who are looking for security provision. as to nigeria, i think one of the things that we forget about wagner is that it's just very standard for a pmc to be operating in africa. that is where the demand is for

a private military company and wagner is no exception. and so i think we sometimes put the cart before the horse when we're surprised that they are clients in places where there is conflict. because peaceful countries are not very good business for a pmc. and moreover, outsourcing, as i think mr. mcfate can explain with his own experience, to contractors in africa is pretty standard. because unfortunately, africa, for a lot of the major countries such as the u.s. and russia, is not a major priority. and so they do not want to put their own troops on the ground and would prefer to outsource to contractors if they can. sohail: ok, that's the harsh reality you might say of what is going on on the ground. sorcha, if i can come in here with you, obviously the u.n. is watching what is going on. the eu has also made a statement last september. i am going to bring in what they said to the human rights commission in geneva on september 20. however the roles and actions of

mercenaries, a category specifically defined in international law, should not be confused with the activities of private military and private security companies, the use of which is lawful in certain circumstances. they go on to say, the report recommends that states adopt legislation aimed at regulating the activities of private military and security companies. it's something we have just touched on in the early part of our conversation. let's not dwell on it too much, but it's frought with problems, isn't it, even if it is approved by different member states in different ways? sorcha: absolutely. and i think you are quoting from my presentation to the human rights council last september. and that was a report on the problems -- because the u.n. -- we do not work for the u.n. we are independent human rights experts. so we approach this very much from a human rights perspective. and so that report we presented last year was about the lack of accountability and access to

justice for victims of mercenaries and private military and security companies. but at the moment, there is a regulatory gap. so as i mentioned earlier, we do have a very clear framework that criminalizes the recruitment, the training, the use, and the financing of mercenaries within a very specific definition. but then we have these other actors which are not legally defined, so private military companies, private military security companies, private security providers. there is a soft framework for them but there is not an internationally binding instrument. and the international community has been meeting over many, many years, and i have been part of that process, and they have been unable to reach an agreement on whether there should in fact be a binding instrument to address in particular the human rights elements or problems associated

with these kinds of actors. because, in a way, it does not matter what you call these actors. if you commit human rights violations, you commit human rights violations. if you commit war crimes or crimes against humanity, which is what we have been seeing with the wagner group in mali, it does not matter. it actually does not matter. the individuals can still be held criminally responsible under international law for those crimes. sohail: i just want to jump in because i want to move on slightly, because there are scenarios that are being discussed internationally about whether, again, mercenaries or armed groups can actually aid governments in certain scenarios. let's just go to pakistan for example. sean, just want to get your opinion on something. we have seen over the years that the polio vaccination scheme that has been tried and tested in the northwest of the country has often come under attack by individuals who do not trust it.

the state itself cannot seem to protect health workers. as one example, this is where ngo's are saying, our own armed groups could possibly protect the health workers who are there to do a civic service. this is the grey area, isn't it, of what is a mercenary and what isn't, and how they are paid? sean: that's right. so, i think that is a moral calculus issue. you can almost see in the future. what we saw with wagner over the weekend, this is not the end of it. and also, mercenaries or armed groups, whatever you call them, they are like fire. they can either burn down your house, but they could power a steam engine. so you can imagine how maybe even in the future an ngo might hire a mercenary group to intervene and stop isil 2.0. so, a lot of good and a lot of bad can come out of mercenaries.

it is not just pure bad. sohail: john, let me bring you in here. a different type of mercenary, those protecting oil tankers and shipping in places like the straits of the asia-pacific, the gulf of guinea, or even in the middle east. some of those, we have seen oil tankers hijacked before, but now we are seeing a scenario where there are armed men being brought in by companies to protect those sorts of vessels. there is a justifiable reason sometimes to have such mercenaries on board in those locations and on those vessels. john: yeah. i mean, i think as sean was saying, it's a very complicated issue and ultimately it comes down to one's own take on the morality and defining what is the greater good. everybody is able to frame their specific interest as some sort of exception, necessary

exception to the rule that should apply to others. i think, interestingly enough, the wagner group developed out of a lot of the private security that was occurring in shipping lanes, especially during the somali piracy crisis. and i think whether we like it or not, there is going to be a demand for that. and that's one thing that i do not think we have addressed, is the demand-side and not necessarily the supply-side. i mean, ultimately, mercenaries are a product of conflict. they are a symptom of the illness, they are not the illness itself. and wagner group i think has come about as well at a particularly interesting time where we are seeing an existential crisis in peacekeeping, specifically in africa, where citizens have seen decades of human peacekeeping missions that have failed to protect civilians, and in a lot cases, intervention after intervention, the situation has

become worse. so, there is a demand for military solutions. sohail: let me come back to sorcha very quickly. we talked a little while ago about the legality of such groups. in some countries they are not allowed, in some countries they are. the u.s. has the largest number of security companies that seem to work internationally, from our research. and even within the constitution under article one, section eight, individuals or groups are allowed to authorize the hire of privateers, as they call it. and of course the constitution was written a couple hundred years ago. but while you look at the eu and your appeal to the eu is to try and regulate the issue of mercenaries, should it not also be pushed towards north america? sorcha: well, from the u.n. working group's perspective, our call for regulation is truly international. we're not picking on any one

particular country, we think the international community should be regulating the use of mercenaries, the use of private military and security contractors, and regulating the services that they provide. and that they should be -- because they are not going to disappear. this is the unfortunate reality when it comes to the sorts of actors that are perhaps not providing combat services. they are not going to disappear. but as i said, there is international regulation that prohibits the use of mercenaries in armed conflicts. but when it comes to the other sorts of activities and the other sorts of services that they are providing, we do see regulatory gaps, and that is usually problematic. and all states, no matter where they are in the world, should be addressing this as a matter of urgency. sohail: and there, sadly, we have to leave the conversation that we have had. but i would really like to thank all of my guests there, sean mcfate, sorcha macleod, and john lechner. thanks so much for joining us on

this edition of "inside story." and thank you for watching as well. you can see the program again any time by visiting our website at aljazeera.com. and for further discussion go to our facebook page. that's facebook.com/ajinsidestory. you can also join the conversation on twitter. our handle there is @ajinsidestory. from me, sohail rahman, and the entire team here, thank you so much for your time and your company. ♪

- [bdget] , mom. h dad. - i' have too this - ridget] don't trt peop like i ce did - i made it! - ridget] don't trt peop like i ce did [bridgetoh, your boy's nna. - clearl things nt wrong - [gabryell] i call it solitary confinement, they might not, but when you get one hour a day, that's solitary confinement. i don't ow if iwould ev let. ♪