The crime–terror continuum revisited: a model for the study of hybrid criminal organisations

Abstract

A deeply-rooted and generally accepted notion of organised crime permeates specialised literature. It builds upon the understanding of crime as an essentially non-ideological and non-political phenomenon. In contrast, organisations that do seem to incorporate an ideological component, most notably terrorist groups, are classified as the antithesis of organised crime and thus are theoretically precluded from actions motivated by profit and greed. This problem, hereby known as the ‘profit versus ideology’ dichotomy, is reinforced by a prevalent view of criminals as ultra-rational, profit-maximising entities operating in a market, excised from their social and cultural background. This article challenges the contention that clandestine, violent organisations can be neatly categorised according to such a rigid taxonomy, and puts into question the validity of the profit-ideology division to advance a more flexible understanding of the criminal phenomenon. In order to do so, the assumptions of the former are explored and contrasted against two case studies: the first one, La Familia (The Family), is a drug-trafficking organisation which was born in the state of Michoacán (southwestern Mexico), and which, despite having emerged quite recently (in 2006) as an independent criminal group, has quickly become one of the most feared and widespread Mexican cartels. The second case is that of Abu Sayyaf, a terrorist organisation born in the early 1990s and which operates in the southern Philippines, specifically in the Mindanao region. A terrorist group with an Islamic agenda and a hard-line drug-trafficking organisation would seem to exemplify the pristine separation between ideology and profit in the criminal world. However, as it will become clear, thinking in terms of ‘pure’ types places a number of conceptual constraints that hinder a comprehensive and balanced understanding of crime.