convergence

Sullivan
state capacity gap), corrupting and co-opting state organs (government, the police, the judiciary)
in all or part of the state through the development of criminal enclaves, or, at the extreme
edge, state failure. State reconfiguration appears to be a more common outcome than abject
state capture or state failure. 3 While failure and reconfiguration may appear to be the same
phenomenon, they have distinct features. State capture (StC) involves criminals subverting
and seizing control of key political functions at the central or national level (politicians, judges,
police, etc.) through corruption. Co-opted state reconfiguration (CStR) involves the systematic
alteration of governance to benefit the criminal enterprise. 4
Co-opted state reconfiguration is a distinct, advanced form of state capture. CStR involves
the participation of lawful and unlawful groups seeking economic, criminal, judicial,
and political benefits together with a quest for social legitimacy. Coercion, political alliances
(complementing or replacing bribery), and impacts on all branches and levels of government are
core features of this dynamic. As Garay and Salcedo-Albarán argue, “The ‘co-opted reconfiguration’
concept accepts that co-optation can be carried out in any direction. In a CStR situation,
it is therefore possible to find scenarios in which legal agents—candidates or officials—are
co-opting illegal agents— paramilitary or subversive groups—and vice versa.” 5 In a CStR
process, state institutions are manipulated and even reconfigured from inside. When officials
are being captured and manipulated from outside, it is reproduced as an StC situation. 6 TCOs
as deviant social networks exploit both dynamics.
Deviant Social Networks and Deviant Globalization
Social networks are important elements of contemporary social and political processes.
Certainly this is not new; social networks have been around since man began assembling in
political groups at all levels of society. Yet the information age is bringing important changes to
the nature of networks. Members of networks can communicate across vast distances in real
time, changing the pace and shape of their individual and collective influence. The importance
of information age networks is a key to understanding emerging conflict.
David Ronfeldt has argued that societies have moved through four distinct (albeit
overlapping) phases of organization: tribes, institutions, markets, and networks. 7 Ronfeldt
and Arquilla discussed the conflict and security dimensions of networks and netwar in
their landmark collection Networks and Netwars. 8 Netwar is essentially an emergent form of
low-intensity conflict, crime, and activism waged by social networked actors, including TCOs,
terrorists, and gangsters. Manuel Castells has also outlined the rise of the networked, information
society in his landmark trilogy The Information Age: Economy, Society, and Culture. 9
Specifically, Castells envisioned the emergence of powerful global criminal networks as one
facet of the shift to a new state/sovereignty structure where the state no longer controlled all
aspects of the economy and society. Networks currently take two shapes: positive networks
that inform civil society and dark side or negative networks that exploit society. These dark
side actors are essentially “criminal netwarriors.”
Transnational gangs and cartels operating as netwarriors are a threat to the sovereignty
of nations. “When states fail to deliver public services and security, criminals fill the vacuum.” 10
This situation leads to a “time of anomalies and transitions,” according to Juan Carlos Garzón.
172