ABSTRACT

A prominent anti-mercenary norm entrepreneur in the second half of the twentieth century, the United Nations (UN) has become an equally prominent user of Private Military and Security Companies (PMSCs) services in the twenty-first century. In this article, we explain the gap between UN talk and action on private providers of security as a form of organized hypocrisy. To map the mismatch between UN rhetoric and behaviour in a measurable fashion, we combined official data on the use of PMSCs with an in-depth content analysis of the reports written by the UN Working Group on Mercenaries and an examination of the UN Department of Safety and Security (UNDSS) contracting policy. The Working Group’s very negative portrayal of PMSCs and the UNDSS caveat that armed contractors should only be used as a last resort and stands in stark contrast with UN agencies’ widespread use of private security providers. Although a decoupling between talk and action is often inevitable for complex organizations simultaneously pursuing contradictory objectives like the UN, our findings have important implications for peacekeeping. Most notably, organized hypocrisy is in danger of challenging the UN’s credibility as a norm entrepreneur, hindering the effectiveness of its agencies’ outsourcing practices and delaying the reform of UN peacekeeping and crisis management at large.

摘要

在二十世纪下半叶，联合国是著名的反雇佣军规范企业家，在二十一世纪，联合国已成为私营军事和安全公司（PMSC）服务的同样重要的使用者。在本文中，我们解释了联合国的谈话与针对私人安全提供者采取的有组织的伪善形式之间的差距。为了以可衡量的方式描绘出联合国言论和行为之间的不匹配，我们将使用PMSC的官方数据与对联合国雇佣军工作组撰写的报告的深入内容分析以及对联合国安全部的审查相结合和安全（UNDSS）签约政策。工作组对私营军事和安保服务公司的负面印象非常深刻，并警告说，武装承包商仅应作为不得已的手段使用，与联合国机构广泛使用私人保安提供者形成鲜明对比。尽管对于同时追求联合国等矛盾目标的复杂组织来说，谈话与行动之间的脱钩通常是不可避免的，但我们的发现对维持和平具有重要意义。最值得注意的是，有组织的伪善有可能挑战联合国作为规范企业家的信誉，阻碍其机构外包实践的有效性，并拖延联合国维和与危机管理的整体改革。尽管对于同时追求联合国等矛盾目标的复杂组织来说，谈话与行动之间的脱钩通常是不可避免的，但我们的发现对维持和平具有重要意义。最值得注意的是，有组织的伪善有可能挑战联合国作为规范企业家的信誉，阻碍其机构外包实践的有效性，并拖延联合国维和与危机管理的整体改革。尽管对于同时追求联合国等矛盾目标的复杂组织来说，谈话与行动之间的脱钩通常是不可避免的，但我们的发现对维持和平具有重要意义。最值得注意的是，有组织的伪善有可能挑战联合国作为规范企业家的信誉，阻碍其机构外包实践的有效性，并拖延联合国维和与危机管理的整体改革。