Securitisation Of Transnational Crime

The securitisation of transnational crime refers to contemporary efforts to curtail
crime flows that take place across international borders via dissolution of the existing
distinctions between external and internal security systems, placing a greater
emphasis in the process upon international cooperation with regards to global
policing, border controls, travel and financial flows. In this way the economic,
political and strategic obstacles standing in the way of a coherent fight against transnational
crime can begin to be effectively removed.

It should be noted that the securitisation of transnational crime has greatly accelerated
in the aftermath of the September 11th terrorist attacks where lax international security
was perceived to have facilitated not only the hijacking of the American planes that
flew into the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon but also the transference of money
which made the suicide missions possible in the first place. Viewed from this
perspective, it is consequently clear that the securitisation of transnational crime
attempts in the first place to instil law, order and international cooperation in what
Chris Dishman refers to ‘the leaderless nexus’ where crime and terrorism converge.
Thus, while the move towards a securitisation of transnational crime ought to be
applauded we must take note of the essential paradox that exists with regards to
attempts to legally solve a problem that operates wholly within the domain of the
lawless. We should also take note of the way in which securitisation has become
increasingly popular since 9/11 suggesting that it is in many ways a knee-jerk reaction
to an unforeseen problem – namely the convergence of trans-national crime and
terrorism. Yet, due to the recent nature of international and regional security reforms,
we should – ultimately – be wary of offering any definitive conclusions to policies
that remain very much at an embryonic stage of development.

However, although it is true that 9/11 has served to accelerate the securitisation of
transnational crime (certainly as far as the collective ‘West’ is concerned), it is also
true that attempts to increase international cooperation in the face of rising global
crime have been in existence before the spectre of trans-national terrorism became
such a prominent international issue. For instance, Ralph Enmmers has charted the
attempts of the Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) and its bid to
effectively securitize crime within that geopolitical locale between 1996 and 1997
with the author noting that while member states have openly declared the link
between regional security and transnational crime they have hitherto fallen short of
implementing bilateral actions due to ongoing resistance to institutional reforms.
Thus, as is the case with the UN’s Transnational Organised Crime Convention, there
remains a sizeable chasm to bridge between theory and practice concerning the
securitisation of transnational crime in the contemporary era.