This study analyses the ambivalent role of securitization: on the one hand, as an essential component of economic development by securing the development of economic activities that contributes to poverty reduction; and, on the other hand, as the basis for protecting individuals especially exposed to human rights’ risks. From a critical perspective on the discourses and mechanisms of both areas of securitization, in the context of mining conflicts in Peru’s Madre de Dios region, this article argues that both approaches collapse over the figure of environmental defenders, making them victims that receive promises of security at the same time of establishing conditions that generate juridical and material precariousness.