The shadow company directed by Nick Bicanic and Jason Baroque talks about  the lives of mercenaries around the world but focuses mainly on the security contractors in Iraq. Shedding more light on the lives of the private security contractors, the Shadow company is an investigative documentary that seeks to reveal the beginnings and destinations of these mercenaries. It tries to satisfy the  questions of who, what and why of private security companies as well as how the rules of war have changed and how mercenaries have changed too. It is an interesting yet inaccurate look into the lives of mercenaries and how mercenaries affect past as well as contemporary conflicts.

What makes this documentary special is that it presents the issues at hand in 3 different forms. One is the personal account method where James Acroft , a security personnel tells us his personal experiences as a mercenary. In the interview sections of the documentary, the CEO’s  as well as past and current members of the private security companies, shed light on the life of a mercenary by answering some  questions.  Lastly, the directors use the small case studies methods, where they focus on other countries that have employed private security companies and assess how successful they were.

Using the personal interview method, the directors are able to make these mysterious mercenaries more relatable.  In personal interviews, the security contractors explain that there is a long procedure to getting hired as a private contractor. Although the personal interview section did shed a lot of light on mercenary life habits, it failed to address the topic of how to choose which mission to undertake. For example, it does not show that there are steps to choosing which country to work in. Alan Bell, the CEO of Global Risks let it be known that he will not  go into a country “with no functioning government”, proving that the private security companies do indeed consider certain factors before accepting a contract. Some CEO’s have also said that they would not post contractors to countries where they would not go, to a large extent proving that they do take into account ethical frameworks, as well as  uncovering the camaraderie amongst the private security contractors. Hence instead of dismissing the negative image of mercenaries as people who kill others for money , it perpetuates the negative image even more.

I enjoyed James personal account method as it presented the daily activities of the mercenaries. He spoke about the food they ate, the people they came into contact with, how they dealt with being so far away from home and how they were communicated with their parents. In the little anecdote which told us about his colleague reassuring his wife that things were alright on the phone during an attack, the directors were able to emphasize the vulnerable sides of these mercenaries, erasing the “Rambo” and tough guy image. Even though this documentary shows how serving in a country plagued with conflict affects their lives,it does not show how the presence of mercenaries in a conflict can affect the whole picture. It spent a lot of time on their daily activities and their training than it did identifying how their presence changes the course of a conflict.

My least favourite method was the use of small case studies. Countries like Sierra Leone, Papua New Guinea employed private  and had different outcomes. It talks about the death rate of civilians when the contractors become involved in the conflict  but Leaves out  the death rate for the mercenaries.  Even though it does acknowledge that these mercenaries could die at any moment on this job, it does not make this poignant by disclosing the number of battle related casualties for the mercenaries.

After watching this documentary, I accept that mercenaries are “ a function of all the other things we do” and accept their roles in conflict.