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
- Taking the Pulse: Is European Diplomacy on Iran Outdated?Commentary
When the U.S.-Iran memorandum of understanding was announced, the UK, France, Germany, and Italy declared their readiness to help demine the Strait of Hormuz and lift nuclear sanctions on Tehran. But does Europe need new tools to recover a diplomatic role?
Rym Momtaz, ed.
- France and Germany Need Their Own Situation RoomCommentary
The Franco-German relationship is on the rocks again. But unlike previous moments of tension, the epochal changes on the world stage require that both step up investment in their bilateral ties.
Rym Momtaz
- From Trade Dependence to Geopolitical Leverage: The EU in an Era of Weaponized InterdependencePaper
As geopolitical rivalry weaponizes global supply chains, the EU’s true vulnerability lies in emerging-risk imports. For these goods, suppliers are growing more concentrated, substitution more difficult, and political risk is looming.
Sinan Ülgen
- European Security Strategy: In Search of a New AmbitionCommentary
The EU is putting together a new security strategy to meet today’s myriad challenges. But for any proposal to be effective, the union needs to grapple with its identity and ambitions.
Pierre Vimont
- Reviving Kosovo-Serbia Normalization TalksCommentary
Three years after the Ohrid Agreement, Kosovo and Serbia remain far from normalization. To revive implementation, the EU should abandon its ambiguity and act as an even-handed arbitrator.
- +1
Miloš Pavković, Fitim Gashi, Iliriana Gjoni, …
