Coup attempt on Putin: Is the use of mercenaries in warfare legal?

author-image
Surinder Singh Oberoi
New Update
Vladimir Putin Wagner

New Delhi: The head of the Wagner mercenary group, Yevgeny Prigozhin, Saturday vowed to take all necessary steps to topple Russia's military leadership, hours after the Kremlin accused him of "armed rebellion".

 

The Wagner Group is a private army of mercenaries that has been fighting alongside the regular Russian army in Ukraine. Tension has been growing between them over how the war has been fought, with Prigozhin changing sides and launching vocal criticisms of Russia's military leadership in recent months.

 

On Friday, the 62-year-old mercenary leader accused the military of launching a deadly missile strike on his troops and vowed to punish them. He did not provide evidence. Prigozhin said the "evil" in Russia's military leadership must be stopped and vowed to "march for justice".

Later, Kremlin said that Wagner will move to neighbouring Belarus as part of deal to defuse rebellion tensions and the criminal case against him will be closed.

 

The ongoing tensions between the Wagner mercenary group and Russia's military leadership have garnered significant attention globally. 

This feature analysis aims to provide an overview of the key aspects surrounding this conflict, including the use of mercenaries in warfare, the legal implications, the role of private security companies, and the potential consequences for Russia's military capabilities.

Use of mercenaries in warfare

The use of mercenaries in warfare has a long and complex history. While international law concerning mercenaries is murky, their presence has been observed throughout various periods, from the condottiere in Italian city-states to Swiss battalions hired out to European countries. In recent history, mercenaries gained notoriety during Africa's decolonisation period, and their role in Afghanistan and Iraq, engaging in destabilising activities and often lacking accountability.

Legal Implications

The legal status of mercenaries remains a matter of controversy, with differing perspectives on the matter. The United Nations General Assembly and the Organisation of African Unity have enacted laws condemning the recruitment of mercenaries to overthrow governments of UN member states. In 1977, an additional Protocol 1 to the Geneva Conventions was established, which deprived mercenaries of combatant or prisoner of war status, rendering them liable to prosecution as ordinary criminals.

However, the determination of who qualifies as a mercenary is subjective and relies on evaluating an individual's motivations for engaging in combat. In 1989, the International Convention declared the recruitment, use, training, and financing of mercenaries as illegal activities. It also prohibited the recruitment of individuals to participate in armed conflicts for private gain. According to the convention, any person who is not a member of an armed force party to the conflict is considered a mercenary. Furthermore, it stipulated that all states should treat mercenary activities as an offence, warranting prosecution or, at the very least, extradition of the individuals involved.

Nonetheless, the United Nations Mercenary Convention, which entered into force in October 2001, has been ratified by only 35 countries, including Italy, Ukraine, Germany, Poland, and Saudi Arabia. Countries like the United States, the United Kingdom, and Russia, which actively employ private military companies (PMCs), did not ratify the convention.

Therefore, the legality of mercenaries depends on the specific country in question. The use of PMCs and mercenaries is considered legal in countries that have not signed the UN treaty. Additionally, if a professional soldier is hired by a sovereign nation to fight on their behalf, their actions are considered legal within that country's jurisdiction. However, if such individuals are captured by the government of an opposing country or any other country that is party to the UN Treaty, they would be deemed illegal combatants.

Role of private security companies

Private security companies have emerged as significant players in modern conflicts. To navigate legal constraints, some companies register with nations and abide by international law. However, this practice raises concerns as states may use private companies as cover for unpopular foreign policies. The use of private security companies, such as US-based Blackwater  (Xe Services LLC), has generated controversy, with allegations of involvement in targeted assassinations and secret military campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Impact on military capabilities 

The escalation of tensions between the Wagner mercenary group and Russia's military leadership poses challenges to Russia's military capabilities.

Wagner, which first played a crucial role in Russia's special military operations in Ukraine, experienced internal strife and an inability to participate in the military operation, which could heavily impact Russia's offensive capabilities. However, the current stalemate in the Russia-Ukraine war might mitigate immediate consequences.

Global attention and reactions

The conflict between the Wagner mercenary group and Russia's military leadership has attracted significant attention worldwide. Numerous countries, including the US, UK, and EU member states, have been closely monitoring the situation. The White House, Britain's defence ministry, and EU leaders have all expressed concern and emphasized the importance of Russia's security forces' loyalty in resolving the crisis. The world media is reporting on the continuing changing situation on the ground.

Conclusion

The tensions between the Wagner mercenary group and Russia's military leadership represent a critical challenge for both internal and external actors. The use of mercenaries in warfare, the legal implications surrounding their engagement, and the role of private security companies all contribute to the complexity of this conflict. The outcome of this situation will test Russia's ability to manage internal pressures and maintain military effectiveness in the face of external challenges.

Subscribe