A Theory of State–Criminal Negotiations: Evidence from Belize City and Medellín

Abstract Why do governments engage in public negotiations with criminal groups, which can be politically costly? I argue that three conditions are necessary for elected authorities to support public negotiations. First, elected authorities support negotiations when the relative conditions of criminal power make it easier to portray negotiations as superior to repression (repression failure frame) or as means to support disaffected youth (marginalisation frame). Second, dialogue brokers – that is, key individuals within government and civil society with know-how about criminal groups – shape government support by inserting concrete negotiation proposals into these frames. Third, electoral security for executive authorities incentivises them to support negotiations. I substantiate this argument by comparing cases in cities with contrasting state capacity and criminal sophistication, Belize City and Medellín.