RUSI 'Guide to Conducting a National Proliferation Financing Risk Assessment' threats, vulnerabilities, and consequences.

The document outlines a comprehensive framework and guidelines for jurisdictions conducting a national proliferation financing (PF) risk assessment.

• https://rusi.org/explore-our-research/publications/special-resources/guide-conducting-national-proliferation-financing-risk-assessment-2024

Here’s a detailed overview focusing on specific threats, vulnerabilities, and consequences related to PF:– reference numbers are provided:

Framework for Assessing PF Threats and Vulnerabilities

Threats:

1. Definition: Threats in the context of PF include designated persons/entities that have previously caused or have the potential to evade, breach, or exploit failures to implement targeted financial sanctions (TFS) 28.

Types of Threats:

1. Actual Threats: These are designated entities or individuals that have successfully financed the acquisition of proliferation-sensitive goods or have raised revenue in support of a WMD program 29.
2. Potential Threats: Entities that have attempted to finance the acquisition of proliferation-sensitive goods or raise revenue for WMD programs 29.
3. Examples: North Korea's use of its diplomatic missions to illicitly move revenue into the formal financial system and its extensive use of multi-jurisdictional networks to obfuscate sanctions evasion 29.

Vulnerabilities:

1. Definition: Vulnerabilities refer to weaknesses in legal, regulatory, political, social, economic, and environmental institutions that can be exploited by threats 30.

Types of Vulnerabilities:

1. Internal Vulnerabilities: These include weaknesses within domestic structures that facilitate the acquisition of proliferation-sensitive goods 31.
2. External Vulnerabilities: These involve weaknesses in regional or international structures that could contribute to the movement of funds supporting WMD programs 31.

Factors Contributing to Vulnerabilities:

1. Weak enforcement capabilities and limited international cooperation.
2. Deficiencies in interagency coordination and information sharing 31.
3. Geographic proximity to proliferating states and porous borders, which can facilitate illicit activities 45.

Consequences:

1. Definition: Consequences involve the outcomes where funds or assets are made available to designated entities, potentially allowing them to source materials for developing WMD 32.

Types of Consequences:

1. Severe Consequences: The extreme scenario of WMD use, which is relatively low probability but high impact 32.
2. Reputational Harm: Jurisdictions found in breach of international obligations may face economic, political damage, and harm to international relations 32.
3. Importance of Consequence Analysis: Jurisdictions should assess both the likelihood of a consequence occurring and its potential impact on national security and stability 32.

SOURCE

https://rusi.org/explore-our-research/publications/special-resources/guide-conducting-national-proliferation-financing-risk-assessment-2024