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
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.
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
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 RisksArticle
- 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 Russia Eurasia Center
- Vučić’s Downfall in Serbia Is Fatal to Russia’s Influence in the BalkansCommentary
The new Serbian leadership may have promised to keep on cooperating with Russia, but soon they will have to make a choice between fighting corruption and sealing lucrative deals with Moscow. The two are mutually exclusive, even if the new leaders in Belgrade haven’t yet realized it.
Maksim Samorukov
- Price Analysis Shows China Holds Upper Hand in Russia Gas Supply TalksCommentary
A leak of Russian gas price data helps establish that China is paying Russia far less than Central Asian countries and Gazprom’s former European customers.
Sergey Vakulenko
- Why Has Tokyo’s Response to Kremlin Challenges Been So Muted?Commentary
Japan’s long-term security policy is driven by concerns about China, and there is little appetite for (or interest in) pursuing a confrontation with Moscow.
James D.J. Brown
- The Future of Russian-European Relations Is BleakCommentary
The truth of the strategic situation is that Europe and Russia are extremely unlikely to be able to “turn the page” on their confrontation within the next two decades.
Arkady Moshes
- In the Kremlin’s AI Propaganda Blitz, the Noise Is the SignalCommentary
Russia’s AI-driven propaganda campaigns operate in a fragmented, chaotic, and often illogical manner. That’s not necessarily a problem for the Kremlin, though: It’s much easier to mimic genuine public debate that way.
Ilya Klishin