# Freelance Mercenaries

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/freelance-mercenaries/238208>\
**Category:** Factual Questions\
**Created:** [April 4, 2004, 6:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/freelance-mercenaries/238208 "2004-04-04T18:29:10Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 2\
**Page:** 2

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Schnitte](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/schnitte/32/9033_2.png) [@Schnitte](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Schnitte)\
**Post date:** [April 6, 2004, 1:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/freelance-mercenaries/238208/21 "2004-04-06T13:33:24Z")

</div>

> [@Paul in Saudi](#):
>
> By definition, Mercenaries are from countries that are not a party to the conflict. The Balckwater people are from the US. They are therefore not mercenaries.

Etymologically, “mercenary” derives from Latin _merces_ meaning salary or pay, so from this POV a mercenary is someone fighting in a war simply because he gets paid for it and not for any other reasons (having been drafted, idealism, etc.). The Geneva Convnetion defines a mercenary like this:

> [@](#):
>
> Article 47.-Mercenaries
> 
> 1. A mercenary shall not have the right to be a combatant or a prisoner of war.
> 
> 2. A mercenary is any person who:
> 
> (a) Is specially recruited locally or abroad in order to fight in an armed conflict;
> 
> (b) Does, in fact, take a direct part in the hostilities;
> 
> © Is motivated to take part in the hostilities essentially by the desire for private gain and, in fact, is promised, by or on behalf of a Party to the conflict, material compensation substantially in excess of that promised or paid to combatants of similar ranks and functions in the armed forces of that Party;
> 
> (d) Is neither a national of a Party to the conflict nor a resident of territory controlled by a Party to the conflict;
> 
> (e) Is not a member of the armed forces of a Party to the conflict; and
> 
> (f) Has not been sent by a State which is not a Party to the conflict on official duty as a member of its armed forces.

It does include the restriction that nationals of either party involved in the conflict are not mercenaries, but remember the purpose this definition fulfils. It’s one of those legal “for the poruposes of this statute” definitions that don’t necessarily coincide with what is generally understood under this term. Since the status of captured mercenaries is worse than that of regular soldiers, the Convnetion saw it fit to restrict the mercenary definition that way. I think, however, that it is fair to call someone who is “motivated to take part in the hostilities essentially by the desire for private gain” a mercenary, because that’s the essential part of the word’s meaning, even if there’s more to the purely legal definition.

As for whether mercenaries exist today, I found this [press release](http://www.northbridgeservices.com/Pressrelease) interesting. It’s from a “private military company,” [Northbridge Services](http://www.northbridgeservices.com), that has repeatedly been called a “mercenary company” in the media.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Schnitte](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/schnitte/32/9033_2.png) [@Schnitte](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Schnitte)\
**Post date:** [April 6, 2004, 1:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/freelance-mercenaries/238208/22 "2004-04-06T13:37:36Z")

</div>

And, of course, there’s the French [Foreign Legion](http://www.legionetrangere.fr/). Decide for yourself if you want to call them mercenaries.

[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/freelance-mercenaries/238208.md?page=1)