Article
Steve Feldstein, Jodi Vittori
{
"authors": [
"Jodi Vittori"
],
"type": "other",
"centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
],
"collections": [
"Anti-Corruption"
],
"englishNewsletterAll": "democracy",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"programAffiliation": "DCG",
"programs": [
"Democracy, Conflict, and Governance"
],
"projects": [],
"regions": [],
"topics": [
"Democracy",
"Security",
"Foreign Policy",
"Global Governance"
]
}
Source: Getty
Other
Security Dimensions of Illicit Financial Flows
Illicit financial flows are crucial to a variety of illegal activities that undermine global and national security, from organized crime to terrorism. National security agencies should make countering these flows—by using national and global instruments—a priority.
By Jodi Vittori
Published on Oct 11, 2018
Source: Council on Foreign Relations
Although the role of illicit financial flows (IFFs) in hindering economic development is well understood, their implications for security—both national and global—have not received enough attention. IFFs are an important manifestation of “deviant globalization.”12 IFFs, for instance, help make crime pay: they aid those associated with transnational organized crime to move and spend their ill-gotten gains. They are also integral to the financing of terrorist and insurgent groups, which threaten domestic and foreign security, imperil civilians and military personnel, and endanger U.S. allies and national interests. Moreover, the ability to launder, stash, and spend funds overseas enables corruption, which can destabilize countries and regions. IFFs can also undermine security forces, rendering them less able to respond to threats of criminality and terrorism.
The U.S. government and other actors can implement policies to help mitigate IFFs and the crime, terrorism, insurgency, and corruption they facilitate. These policies will not eliminate security threats in the United States or abroad, but they can assist law enforcement and the military to meet those threats and reduce the leverage of actors that foster state fragility. IFFs should be recognized as contributing to threats to the homeland, and national security agencies should make countering IFFs—by using national and global instruments—a priority.
This report was originally published by the Council on Foreign Relations.
Notes
[1] Nils Gilman, Jesse Goldhammer, and Steven Weber, “Deviant Globalization,” in Convergence: Illicit Networks and National Security in the Age of Globalization, eds. Michael Miklaucic and Jacqueline Brewer (Washington, DC: National Defense University Press, 2013), 5, http://ndupress.ndu.edu/Portals/68/Documents/Books/convergence.pdf.
[2] Gilman, Goldhammer, and Weber, “Deviant Globalization.”
About the Author
Jodi Vittori
Former Nonresident Scholar, Democracy, Conflict, and Governance Program
Jodi Vittori was a nonresident scholar in the Democracy, Conflict, and Governance Program. She is an expert on the linkages of corruption, state fragility, illicit finance, and U.S. national security.
- Trump’s Sovereign Wealth Fund Brings High Stakes and Serious Risks
- Sovereign Wealth Funds: Corruption and Other Governance RisksResearch
- +6
Lakshmi Kumar, David Szakonyi, Clare Rewcastle Brown, …
Recent Work
Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.
More Work from Carnegie Europe
- How the EU Can Become Energy IndependentCommentary
The closure of the Strait of Hormuz has triggered a global energy crisis, but Europe is stuck in reaction mode. Without more strategic foresight, the EU will remain dependent on fossil fuels and will never be truly secure.
Milo McBride, Pauline Gerard
- Deciphering Europe’s Relationship with TurkeyCommentary
Debate is heating up on how Turkey could be integrated into a common European defense framework. Commercial and industrial deals offer a better chance at alignment than sweeping political efforts.
Marc Pierini
- Taking the Pulse: Is it Worth it for Europeans to Placate Trump?Commentary
After spending much of 2025 trying to placate Donald Trump, some European leaders are starting to change posture. But is even a hostile Washington still so important to Europe that the U.S. president’s outbursts are worth putting up with?
Rym Momtaz, ed.
- Europeans Are Quiet Quitting the United StatesCommentary
European leaders have now not only lost faith in Donald Trump’s U.S. presidency, but also in America’s hegemony as a whole. But short-term challenges make an immediate divorce unwise.
Rym Momtaz
- EU Integration Without Ratification?Article
Countries face several hurdles in joining the EU, including the final stage of ratifying their accession treaties. Procedural reforms and substantive adjustments could help move the process forward.
Stefan Lehne
