Foreign Affairs committee  I'm in wholesale agreement with three broad points you made. One, having the kinds of preventive measures in place to prevent being a destination for illicit capital is incredibly important. Two, countries, particularly western democracies, are better together, which is to say that in targeting particular problems, whether it's human rights abuses, WMD proliferation, or counterterrorism—you name the sort of illicit activity—western democracies and others are far more effective when they act in concert.

Foreign Affairs committee  The ombudsperson at the UN, do you mean?

Foreign Affairs committee  Right.

Foreign Affairs committee  Yes. As you know, I'm sure, the ombudsperson at the UN for a long time was a Canadian judge, Kim Prost, who did an exceedingly fantastic job. I think there are two important things I would focus on. I'm less concerned with the particular institutions than with the functions they serve.

Foreign Affairs committee  Absolutely. Thank you very much for your question. I think judicial involvement in the sanctions process is critical to the integrity and legitimacy of the enterprise. At the outset, I want to make sure that I'm clear about that. I would say that there are two characteristics of a sanctions regime that are important, and I think this has troubled the EU in some regard.

Foreign Affairs committee  Sure. I would make two or three related points. First, there are very few people who would advance the argument that sanctions alone will solve any particular foreign policy crisis. To take Iran, which is the most I think poignant recent example, sanctions there I think were designed to generate leverage that would ultimately be used in a course of diplomatic negotiations.

Foreign Affairs committee  I'll address one of your points on the preventive versus punitive discussion. Second, I'll talk about the importance of symbolism. What I meant by that is that the classic understanding of criminal prosecution is that, one, it applies to completed conduct. There is some resemblance there with financial sanctions.

Foreign Affairs committee  I'll perhaps generalize the point a bit more and note that the general pattern now is to impose costs on states by targeting individual entities or individual persons that will be perceived to have an impact. To take the example of Russia, but perhaps a slightly different example, after the violence in Ukraine accelerated in early 2014, the U.S. and many of its partners in the EU and elsewhere imposed sanctions that were designed to shape the cost-benefit calculations of Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Foreign Affairs committee  Thank you very much for your question. I couldn't put a precise number on it, but I would think about enforcement and compliance in two respects. The first is enforcement and compliance costs borne by the government itself. The U.S. Department of the Treasury has an office called OFAC, the Office of Foreign Assets Control, which I alluded to, and it enforces financial sanctions.

Foreign Affairs committee  Chairman Nault and Vice-Chairs Allison and Laverdière, good afternoon. It is an honour to appear before you today. My opening remarks will focus on two main issues: first, a few ways to think about the goals of financial sanctions; and second, some of the processes by which the U.S. government imposes financial sanctions.

Foreign Affairs committee  I can hear you very well. Thank you.