For critics, Blackwater represents some of the most controversial chapters of the Iraq War. The company became widely associated with the 2007 Nisour Square shooting, where Blackwater Worldwide employees were accused of killing unarmed Iraqi civilians. That incident became the most infamous example, but it was not the only controversy tied to the company during its years operating in Iraq.

The political weight of the name became so great that Blackwater Worldwide rebranded as Xe in 2009 and later as Academi LLC. Over time, the company moved from its founders, former Navy SEAL Erik Prince and Al Clark, into new ownership before eventually being folded into the Constellis Group alongside Triple Canopy.

But for some who served or worked in Iraq during the height of the war, Blackwater carries a different meaning. Its contractors provided security for the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad. They protected senior officials, diplomats, and other high-value personnel operating in one of the most dangerous environments in the world. The deaths of four Blackwater contractors in Fallujah also became one of the events that helped trigger the first major battle for the city.

Today, Blackwater is no longer an active brand, but its legacy still dominates the public conversation around private military contractors. The company’s rise, failures, controversies, and operational role in Iraq helped shape how governments, contractors, and the public view the private security industry.

In this episode of Force for Hire, we speak with Deborah Avant, a professor at the Josef Korbel School of International Studies at the University of Denver, about Blackwater’s history and long-term impact.

We also welcome back Sean McFate, a former self-described mercenary and professor of strategy at the National Defense University and Georgetown University, to discuss the private military contractor that generated more headlines than any other.

“PMCs are moving beyond battlefield support and into crisis response, logistics security, and infrastructure protection. That shift creates new opportunities, but it also raises serious questions about oversight and accountability.” — POC

The contracting environment is also shifting. Governments are increasingly favoring short-term, rapid-deployment contracts that allow security firms to respond within days instead of months. Multinational companies operating in high-risk regions are also relying more directly on private security providers for facility protection, convoy security, evacuation planning, and supply chain protection. This signals a broader industry trend: private contractors are no longer being viewed only as battlefield support, but as operational tools for managing instability, protecting economic interests, and maintaining movement through fragile regions.

This expansion is creating new challenges. Friction between contractors and local forces can increase when rules of engagement, command structures, and mission expectations are not clearly aligned. Oversight groups are also paying closer attention to contractor activity tied to resource security, especially where agreements lack transparency or public approval. As POC sees it, “the future of overseas contracting is moving toward speed, mobility, and infrastructure protection—but the faster these missions expand, the more important accountability becomes.” The industry’s next phase will likely be defined by rapid-response capability, logistics security, and the ability to operate in gray-zone environments where military, humanitarian, and corporate interests increasingly overlap.