|
Article Excerpt
Facing sophisticated, resistant, and highly motivated terrorist and transnational crime threats and numerous difficulties inherent in countermeasures, law enforcement and security providers have shifted from a bureaucratic and hierarchical approach toward a networking morphology. This trend more adequately equalizes the capacities of law enforcement authorities to combat fluid and flexible criminal networks. This article highlights new cooperation mechanisms that are being added to the existing instruments available to law enforcement agencies. The emphasis is on the role of informal initiatives by members of the law enforcement community. Based on the generally accepted assumption that state-driven initiatives generally constrain the level of contributions that formal international agreements can provide, we suggest that the staff of international organizations alter the environment in which law enforcement agencies must collaborate. This will enable the organizations to act as informal entrepreneurs that thrive in building the capacity of states to enhance their participation rates in international systems of information exchange and joint strategy development. KEYWORDS: international cooperation, international policing, networks, international security, entrepreneurship.
**********
The concept of human security outlined in the Millennium Declaration formally recognizes, for the first time, the limitations of the Westphalian order, which established a clear line between external state security and internal public safety. One of the greatest threats to human security has been the rise of transnational criminal organizations that exploit the opportunities created by a global economy, weak and failing states that cannot properly enforce the rule of law, and a strong worldwide demand for illicit goods and services. Even if the scope of the underground economy is subject to debate, (1) no one questions the destructive impact of these activities on human security.
While such criminal organizations are not new, as the long histories of the Yakuza in Japan, the Mafia in Sicily and the United States, and the Triads in China attest, the end of the Cold War and the fragmentation of power it created in many parts of the world, combined with the technological revolution that affects every facet of human activity, paved the way for the emergence of a new social morphology--the network--that was embraced by these fluid and adaptable criminal organizations. (2) Networks are usually presented as an alternative to hierarchies and markets because they are more flexible and adaptable than hierarchies, and more coordinated than markets. The damage that the Al-Qaida terrorist network inflicted on police and intelligence hierarchies and on the US market economy has often been used to illustrate the superiority of networks over other social organizing forces. Many authors have emphasized the competitive edge that networks give organized crime syndicates and terrorist groups. (3)
Criminal and terrorist networks are able to use the trust between their members to decrease formal bureaucratic processes and structures, thereby making it easier to escape detection by security organizations. The adaptability, redundancy, and decentralized nature of networks make them very resistant to enforcement efforts: removal of some members or even one layer of the network will temporarily hinder, but not compromise, the operational capabilities of the whole network. The versatility of networks also allows them to exploit new opportunities quickly and at little cost, which is very different from slower moving police agencies whose bureaucracies are not as responsive. Finally, criminal networks are "boundary spanners": they transcend borders and override territorial sovereignties, (4) threatening the stability of governments and the security of their citizens. The purpose of this article is not to provide an additional contribution to the burgeoning literature in this area, but to show the ripple effects of the trend toward the use of networks in criminal organizations. Particular attention will be given to how network morphology is also becoming part of law enforcement and security organizations, a change that is seen by a growing number of researchers and practitioners as the only viable way to fight transnational organized crime and terrorism.
The benefits of networks are not restricted to the underground world of organized crime. Multinational corporations and local organizations for economic development are also moving toward this new form of governance. (5) Scholars studying organized crime and counterterrorism have often noted the need for a flattening of hierarchies and the creation of security networks that can match the capabilities of their illicit opponents, preferably through technology such as interconnected databases and data mining of dispersed information or the creation of new structures that facilitate the sharing and pooling of scarce resources, thereby avoiding duplication of efforts. This suggestion is not made without caveats: there have been attempts to establish international security networks, but these have rarely been acknowledged, due to their lack of success. This suggests that effective implementation, not awareness, is the problem. For example, the paradigm shift from hierarchies to networks implies a redistribution of power among the organizations involved and is likely to generate fierce resistance from those who believe such changes would lead to their being shortchanged. The issue of scale is also important. Illegal networks are usually small and can rely on shared ethnic or religious roots to maintain their cohesiveness while security networks bring together thousands of individuals with various values. Larger networks also raise the issue of multiplication of technologies, procedures, and practices. It is not yet clear if the competitive advantage of networks can be sustained after they reach a certain size.
This article examines the interrelational dynamics of transnational
security networks and their members and the entrepreneurial initiatives that contribute to shaping their identity and roles as well as their influence on existing and new security mechanisms. Can security networks live up to their promises in the fight against transnational crime and the provision of human security? In the first section, we discuss the historical and conceptual framework, showing that security networks have emerged and dissolved over the past two hundred years. We also provide an exploratory typology of security networks and their members that illustrates the plurality and diversity of actors and interests involved. In a second section, we focus on a case study of the two main international organizations in the field of police cooperation, both of which are members of broader security networks and can be construed as networks unto themselves.
Methodology
Between 2001 and 2005, we conducted two dozen interviews with officials directly involved in international police cooperation, particularly as it pertains to participation in Europol and Interpol, the two formal international police cooperative organizations. Interpol was created from the bottom up by national police agencies confronted by problems that called for cooperation. Europol was developed as the result of political commitments to encourage multilateral collaboration in the fight against transnational crime. Although these historical differences in their development should be noted, their current structures, missions, and raison d'etre are strikingly similar, especially with regard to their contribution to the multilateral fight against transnational crime. Data gathered during these interviews revealed the nature of internetwork relations and the entrepreneurial initiatives of the actors involved. These face-to-face meetings gave us insight into the strategies used by various actors to retain control over the resources deployed by these networks or to ensure that the actions of...
|
