Arguing from the traditional point of view with regard to the concept of securitization, this work analyses the effects securitization has on international environmental policy on the example of four case studies—the Rio Conference, the climate change regime, the ozone depletion regime as well as the fragmented forest regime. Contrasting securitization to the variables of regime complexity and the national interest, its twofold effects become evident. While succeeding in “raising the stakes” of an issue, securitization at the same time provokes conflicts between either the actors involved (e.g., forest convention negotiations) or the actors and the regime itself (e.g., climate change regime).