The recent agreement between Erik Prince and the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) rekindled a global debate on the role of private military companies (PMC) in fragile states. As a initiative of logistics reform and mineral taxation, the agreement places the prince at the center of one of the most volatile and volatile nations in Africa. In the midst of concerns about sovereignty and security, the move signals the last chapter of prince’s controversial career and reflects the broader resurgence of the privatized war through the continent.
Erik Prince, founder of the controversial Blackwater, was a key figure and divider of private security and armed conflicts. Its career trajectory reveals not only the transformation of war into a privatized company, but also the risks of outsourcing of the state functions in business interest. Created in 1995, it quickly got importance during American military campaigns in Afghanistan and Iraq. At a time when the American Ministry of Defense was exaggerated, Prince offered a solution: a private army capable of protecting diplomats, embassies and assets in war areas. One of his first most notable contracts was an agreement of $ 21 million in 2003 to protect Ambassador Paul Bremer in Iraq. He also obtained a $ 92 million contract with the CIA for paramilitary support providing training, logistics and assistance with secret operations. This also included targeting of drones, rendering missions and the training of foreign assets. This contract marked one of the first confirmed links between Blackwater and the controversial controversial program of CIA targeted Killing.
However, Blackwater quickly became notorious for its excessive use of strength and lack of responsibility. The Massacre of Nisour Square 2007, in which Blackwater Guards killed 14 civilians in Baghdad, including two children, aroused global conviction. Although four members of the company were condemned by American courts, they were then pardoned by President Donald Trump, arousing indignation and renewing concerns concerning the impunity enjoyed by private military entrepreneurs. Intensifying its controversial reputation, Blackwater Worldwide would have set up a network of more than 30 companies or screens, as revealed by Congress investigators and former initiates. This network was, in part, designed to help get millions of dollars in government contracts despite growing control surrounding its conduct in Iraq. Although it is not clear how many of these entities have obtained contracts, at least three would have had agreements with the American army or the CIA. Since 2001, Blackwater and its affiliates have obtained up to 600 million dollars in classified contracts to the intelligence community, according to an US government official.
Despite the sale of Blackwater in 2010 and its subsequent brand change – first as XE services, then as Academi, and later under the aegis of Constelis Holdings – Prince remained a powerful and controversial figure in world security networks. He then established new companies such as reflex responses, a force supported by water and the frontier services Group (FSG), which worked in Africa and supported Chinese commercial interests. In 2023, the American government imposed sanctions on the Frontier Services Group (FSG) concerning allegations that it was involved in the formation of Chinese military pilots, adding another layer of controversy with the already complex public reputation of Erik Prince. In addition, the United Nations investigated him for an alleged role in a mercenary operation failed in Libya, which included alleged violations of arms trafficking. Prince rejected these accusations, saying that he had no involvement in any activity related to Libya.
These incidents reflect a coherent scheme in Prince’s career: an ability to remain active and influential in military and security spaces despite recurring legal and ethical controversies. His public character continues to be closely linked to Blackwater, even years after having disabled the company, because of its fundamental role and its participation continues in companies related to security.
Prince’s trajectory is emblematic of a broader trend: the resurgence and normalization of private military entrepreneurs, in particular through Africa. With more than 35 non -international armed conflicts underway on the continent and the military of the state often lacking in capacity, African governments have turned more and more to PMC to fill the safety vacuum cleaners. Libya, for example, has welcomed more than 20,000 foreign fighters in recent years. In the Central African Republic, around 2,000 private soldiers were deployed to support government forces. Similar developments have taken place in Sudan, Mozambique, Mali and Burkina Faso. In many of these contexts, PMCs operate in opaque legal environments, with minimum surveillance and significant operational freedom. Their growing presence reflects the internationalization of African conflicts and the growing strategic importance of the continent, in particular in terms of critical resources such as rare earth minerals and energy reserves.
Prince’s return to Africa in 2025 thanks to a controversial agreement with the DRC marks significant development in this broader trend. The DRC is the largest producer of cobalt and critical copper supplier – vital minerals for the global green energy transition. The country has long fought against smuggling, subinvolution and illicit trade, making it a main target for external actors promising efficiency and control. However, Prince’s participation has aroused concern. Former UN reports accused her of having planned to deploy thousands of Latin American mercenaries in North Kivu to protect mining operations – an accusation that continues to shade his current efforts. Given Prince’s story to function in such a way as to blur the boundaries between military engagement and commercial interest, skepticism around the true intention of the DRC agreement is justified.
For the DRC, the immediate attraction of more strict safety and control over mineral income must be weighed with the long -term implications of the deepening of links with private security actors. Prince’s involvement presents the risks linked to national sovereignty, the potential for human rights violations and the possible empowerment of inexplicable forces in an already fragile state. Its previous companies have shown that “logistics” can be an understatement for much broader operational ambitions, including often armed protection and control over access to precious resources. In addition, its ability to attract geopolitical support – from China to previous efforts, or via silent partnerships with other state and business players – suggests that its operations are rarely isolated from wider strategic interests.
Prince’s influence also reflects increasing geopolitical competition in Africa. While world powers are competing for access to critical minerals and strategic implementation, private military companies serve as intermediaries – offering a mixture of denial, efficiency and impact on the ground that traditional states often cannot. In such an environment, actors and prince prospered. Their operations remain not only the security landscape, but also redefine what it means to exercise control in areas rich in resources and politically volatile. While some African governments may consider these arrangements as necessary evils, the longer term consequences could include weakened state institutions, eroded public confidence and increased conflicts.
Read more in -depth on international relations
