Pete

I can accept my 'market model' may be unconvincing for a various reasons, but disregarding organisational security and religious affiliation are not among them.

Simple markets such as that described ignore these factors, relying on incentives being met through the price mechanism. You describe externalities - side effects of an action influencing the well-being of non-consenting parties (every Muslim in the world is not a Jihadi).

I agree these parties will turn to Islamic nations for training in the first instance. But to think they will not widen the search to include 'infidels' is naive. How many Muslim nations produce motor vehicles for car bombs or AK47s for foot soldiers? Not too many, and these organisations have little compunction in meeting their needs in these areas through the wider market. My argument is we will eventually see similar behaviour with organisations such as PMCs - something you appear to agree with in your comments on Merv Bendle's piece "9-11: treason in the academic comfort zone?"

"So I'd say unlike AIDS etc the counter terrorism push is a security and defence business. Its an enormous and growing business under conservative governments in the English speaking countries..."

In relation to your other issue, al Qaeda may indeed consider PMCs as 'one of the worst manifestations of the "infidel, Crusader" threat'. All the more reason they might choose to use these very people against the West. Just like they did on September 11 with the aviation industry and symbols of global capitalism, the World Trade Centre. Doing so is yet another example of guerilla warfare improvisation - low 'cost' with maximum effect.

Jeremy Ballenger

Jeremy

I appreciate your comments on my comments on your article. I also note you have looked at more of my OLO comments and perhaps visited my modest website a couple of times in the last 12 hours.

While its true that one should not underestimate al Qaeda’s habit of launching surprising operations every 4-5 years in new, newsworthy and deadly ways, it is not run like a business - unlike PMCs, some armies and security services.

What you call externalities and simple markets is an interesting approach but hardly fits PMCs and al Qaeda. I see al Qaeda as mostly an outgrowth of Saudi clan tensions, where operational security, making a media splash (of blood) and harnessing the willingness of its expendable agents to blow are crucial elements. This makes al Qaeda an unlikely customer of services that PMCs might consciously provide.

Regarding your scenario of “A team of four former Special Forces personnel” setting off a bomb in London, al Qaeda would constitute a very wary consumer of such a PMC product because they couldn’t trust PMCs not to take their money and then “dob them in”. The bosses and rank and file of al Qaeda would also have kittens entrusting their Allah-given duties to a band of Western, infidel, recent killers of their Muslims.

Now you’ve referred to the arms trade. This unwitting supply of goods to (say) the Afghani, Pakistani or especially the Iraqi military may well find its way to al Qaeda but PMCs are more into service provision.

If PMCs provide demolition training to Saudi Special Forces this may well be training some Saudis who subsequently take their knowledge to al Qaeda. This is unwitting but an unfortunate concession to those who have oil power and money.

Certainly the training of Saudi and UAE novice pilots in how to fly airliners (but not to land them) was a suspicious use of Western flight simulators. Most eyes were of course on Iraq after that...:) Again that training (like the intelligence on Iraq) was unwitting or witless.

Pete
http://spyingbadthings.blogspot.com

PS. I operate on Washington DC time…

Attention all warriors in the War on Terror -

Here is your Commander In Chief at his latest press conference:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/09/20060915-2.html

- and a direct link to the video:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/09/20060915-2.v.smil

Yes, it's the man himself - the big cheese - sent by almighty God to face down the BIGGEST GUL-DURN DANGER - EVER.

I dare you warriors to watch the whole hour. See if you can come away with your smug certainties intact.

Truthseekers will note that the Prez puts his big foot in it at the 4 minute mark, when he accidentally references explosives used at the WTC - whoops! Alas, no reporter has the guts to ask a question about that. Where's Helen Thomas when you need her?

The War on Terror has as much credibility as George W Bush - no more and no less. He is a fall-guy, a patsy, and in the end only held out as a kind of mascot for the opportunists who wish it to be.

*

Holly Deane-Johns and Shapelle Corby were prepared to be drug mules so what is stopping any red-blooded Australian from copying the "boys on the border" and becoming soldiers of fortune as there seems that there are some soldiers will be surplus to the Australian Regular Army shortly and together with other bored types here in Australia will be mouthing a few "crikeys" and "she'll be rights" together whith the Afrikaans at the Baghdad poolside.