A humble Royal Australian Air Force corporal has collected one of the Australian Defence Force’s most prestigious writing accolades for a short but very sharp piece on the dangers of outsourcing at the pointy end of the mission.
Corporal Matthew Thornton has won the Corporal Margaret Clarke Award for writing on military affairs for his submission, “Multinational Mercenaries: The dangers of private sector operational environment”, which warns of the risks associated with divesting operational capability to the private sector and the consequences that could follow.
Thornton’s essay analyses the effects of the military abrogating its core capabilities to the private sector rather than retaining them internally, and how this could translate in a real conflict scenario.
The piece, published in May on Defence’s Air/Space Blog, overtly and critically questions the reliance on private military contractors by comparing similar historical precedents and analysis, not least “a reality that mirrors history, as described in the teachings of Niccolò Machiavelli, the 16th-century political theorist.”
“Tell me if you’ve heard this one,” Thornton posits.
- “An ADF unit finds itself facing a five-member understaffing issue;
- It contracts civilian support to fill the gap;
- Five members of the unit transition into those positions, privately hired to perform a military role for pay (e.g. mercenary (Merriam-Webster, n.d.)) and come to work wearing polo shirts;
- The unit is now down 10 members, and the process begins again.
In particular, the RAAF finds itself most deeply becoming trapped in this dynamic, as Australia has modernised its fleet — acquiring advanced platforms — and suffered the same recruitment and retention problems during the late 2010s and early 2020s as other militaries,” Thornton wrote.
Ouch.
Here’s another burst of fresh citrus.
“It (the RAAF) has increasingly turned to private contractors to fill capability gaps. First, I would like to acknowledge the undeniable benefits to arrangements with these entities. They are, however, well outlined in other articles on the Forge (Brown, 2021). That being said, a reliance on corporate soldiers also comes with significant drawbacks.”
“Consider the role of defence contractors in air power. These organisations are not just suppliers of equipment; they increasingly provide maintenance, training, and even operational capabilities,” Thornton wrote.
“Take, for example, a program within RAAF to provide kinetic capability but exclusively operated by a multinational contractor, which includes proprietary software that requires company support to maintain and a ‘just-in-time’ logistics system that is managed exclusively by the contractor’s office.
“RAAF’s partnership with the contractor keeps costs down during peacetime, and during asymmetric operations such as strikes on ISIS, where the mission was to degrade and destroy an organisation (without breaking the bank). During wartime, however, it creates a dependency that erodes Australia’s sovereign control over critical Defence functions if it’s the contractor, not the user, that prioritises who gets supplies or support, and when they get them (Trevithick & Rogoway, 2023).”
The TLDR [or ‘too long, didn’t read’] version of that is that private contractors serve different masters than a sovereign force does and thus there is a different decision tree. And that’s before morality is involved.
“A reliance on military contractors creates political, strategic, and social vulnerabilities. In a hypothetical conflict scenario, private firms might prioritise shareholder interests or allegiance to their home nation over Australian national security,” Thornton wrote.
“Consider a situation where a contractor withdraws support due to financial or political considerations. The result could be catastrophic, leaving military assets grounded or operationally compromised. Additionally, contractors often operate under different accountability standards than national forces, raising ethical and security concerns.”
That rationale explains, quite lucidly, why firms like Huawei were excluded from critical infrastructure like the National Broadband Network and 5G mobile rollout.
Thornton argues that a nation’s ability to defend itself shouldn’t be “contingent on private interests,” adding that “Machiavelli’s warning” resonates on this issue: “A prince must lay solid foundations for his power, for otherwise he must necessarily be destroyed.”
Thornton argues that “in the context of air power, such foundations must include a robust and self-sufficient air force that can both collaborate and act independently of external actors if required.”
“Australia now stands at a crossroads. After years of budget cuts and personnel shortages, the RAAF is on the road to replenishment. Recruitment initiatives are gaining momentum, and technological advancements are making platforms more user-friendly,” Thornton wrote.
“This period presents an opportunity to reassert sovereign control over air power by reducing, not removing, the reliance on private contractors.”
There are four common-sense recommendations, but the first and most poignant one is to staunch the blood supply to leeching firms.
“By scaling back contracted workforces, there is an incentive for ADF members to remain in, or return to, enlistment. This has the potential to reduce the lucrative incentives for the same roles, minimising competition for personnel (these positions are ultimately funded by the Defence budget),” Thornton wrote.
That sounds like exactly the problem Defence’s contractor poaching moratorium is seeking to address.
As the references to Machiavelli denote, the thinking may not be all that new or novel, but Thornton’s approach is clear, compelling and concise. And he’s happy to credit the riff.
“Machiavelli’s scorn for mercenaries is well documented in his works. In The Prince, he describes them as “disunited, ambitious, without discipline, unfaithful, bold among friends, cowardly among enemies.” Though his critique was aimed at the condottieri of Renaissance Italy, the parallels to modern private military contractors are striking.
That’s the kinetic effect of striking, rather than the industrial or commercial one. It’s an SLA kinda thing.
READ MORE:
Anxious and confused: Australia, Russia and Indonesia’s flexible politics
