• Research
  • Politika
  • About
Carnegie Russia Eurasia center logoCarnegie lettermark logo
  • Donate
{
  "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.

Link Copied
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.

Read Full Text

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.

    Recent Work

  • Article
    Trump’s Sovereign Wealth Fund Brings High Stakes and Serious Risks
      • Steve Feldstein

      Steve Feldstein, Jodi Vittori

  • Research
    Sovereign Wealth Funds: Corruption and Other Governance Risks
      • +6

      Lakshmi Kumar, David Szakonyi, Clare Rewcastle Brown, …

Jodi Vittori
Former Nonresident Scholar, Democracy, Conflict, and Governance Program
DemocracySecurityForeign PolicyGlobal Governance

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

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    What Should We Take From Andrey Melnichenko’s Essay in the Economist?

    Andrey Melnichenko’s essay offers no answer to the fundamental question of how, under any kind of negotiated settlement, Europe can protect itself from the Russian ressentiment that is inevitable in all scenarios except for an outright victory for Putin.

      Leonid Bershidsky

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    Parliamentary Elections in Occupied Ukraine Risk Backfiring for the Kremlin

    Despite unhappiness on the ground, Moscow is determined to use both carrot and stick to ensure there is record support for United Russia in occupied Ukraine.

      Konstantin Skorkin

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    Lukashenko’s Concessions to Kyiv Reflect Russia’s Weakness

    The recent damage inflicted by Ukrainian drones and missiles on Russia has made Belarus aware of its own vulnerabilities—and surprisingly amenable to Kyiv’s demands.

      Artyom Shraibman

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    Could Ukraine Succeed in Torpedoing Putin’s Approval Ratings?

    It is not a phenomenon unique to Russia that the public of a country at war (even the aggressor) enduring airstrikes will not overturn its government but rather show solidarity with it and blame its woes on the enemy.

      Vladislav Gorin

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    Iran War Fallout Gifts Putin Diplomatic Victory at ASEAN Summit

    Russia looks set to reap economic benefits from closer ties with Southeast Asian countries that are keen to find reliable energy suppliers and diversify trade ties.

      • Alexander Gabuev

      Alexander Gabuev

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center
Carnegie Russia Eurasia logo, white
  • Research
  • Politika
  • About
  • Experts
  • Events
  • Contact
  • Privacy
  • For Media
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.