International Organizations, Security Dichotomies and the Trafficking of Persons and Narcotics in Post-Soviet Central Asia: A Critique of the Securitization Framework

Abstract

This article offers a constructive critique of the Copenhagen School's ‘securitization’ framework by applying it in an analysis of the role of international organizations seeking to counter the trafficking of narcotics and persons in post-Soviet Central Asia. The study discovers common and divergent motivations that explain international attempts and failures to securitize. In the case of human trafficking, significant clashes created obstacles to international efforts. In both cases, international organizations advanced their agendas through the language of security, but also through institutional changes and increased resource allocation. These processes led to the adoption of mostly traditional security strategies. The analysis concludes that although the securitization framework makes significant contributions as an analytical tool, its definition is too vague and it is too narrow in focus. ‘Security dichotomies’ need to be taken into account in a comprehensive analysis of why international attempts to securitize issues sometimes succeed and sometimes fail. The influence of rhetoric on the development of policy should also be taken into account if the securitization framework is to provide a complete understanding of the issues or be useful for policymakers.

Analysing the European Union's responses to organized crime through different securitization lenses

“…With a few exceptions, however, OC has rarely featured as a case-study for securitization (for exceptions, please see Stritzel 2012, 2007, Jackson 2006. To be more precise, although it is possible to find the concept of securitization referred to in works dedicated to OC, such association is usually loosely framed and does not engage with ST itself (Mitsilegas 2003, Emmers 2002.…”

“…Such studies, however, remain considerably limited in number when compared to other security areas. Where the securitization of OC is concerned specifically, studies such as the ones by Stritzel (2012Stritzel ( , 2007 and Jackson (2006) have applied ST as an analytical tool to study actors' discursive practices, their framing of OC in a security lexicon and the consequences of such security embedded responses.…”

“…Although some authors working on OC have also discussed whether securitization processes have succeeded or not (Jackson 2006), insufficient attention has been devoted to the methodology employed to reach such conclusion (Balzacq 2011). In particular, little work has been carried out in terms of exploring which criteria or indicators can be used to justify success or failure claims.…”

"The war on crime": The securitization of narco-trafficking in Mexico during the Calderon administration.

“…In any case, works that apply the securitization framework to study the issue of narco-trafficking are especially limited. At the time of writing, there are only three works that use this framework to study the illegal drug trade: two articles published in academic journals (Jackson, 2006;Crick, 2012) and a thesis (Brinkmoeller, 2011). Therefore, my third research objective is to assess about the viability of using this framework to study narcotrafficking in a real-life context.…”

“…First, this thesis adds to the works that seek to apply the securitization framework to study real-life problems. Second, it also contributes by assessing securitization 13 theory's validity outside of Europe, which has been its dominant geographic focus so far (Huysmans, 1998;Hansen, 2000;Waever, 2004;Jackson, 2006;Wilkinson, 2007). Both goals will serve to broaden the applicability of the theory.…”