Departing from the ‘textbook history and rationale’ behind the IMF, this 30 minute panel discussion (link below) exposes the controversies, complexities, and utility underlying the IMF today. Needless to say, all of these topics hold relevance regarding conflict prevention, resolution and post-conflict stability.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p02xdr0g
Trigger warning: Neither Dr Evil nor Keyboard Cat appear in the discussion. Nevertheless, other A-List celebrities were found. These include:
David Lipton: IMF First Deputy Managing Director
Ngaire Woods: Dean of Blavatnik School of Government and Professor of Global Economic Governance, Oxford
Professor Kenneth Rogoff: Professor of Economics at Harvard University and former Chief Economist at the IMF
Security, Conflict and International Development (SCID) 
I would have to say that since the establishment of the IMF and other relevant financial organizations, we’ve seen multiple political and economical changes. These ranges from the rise of China as an industrial superpower and later establishing the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank that serves a similar purpose, though not a monetary one. I agree that the when looking into post-conflict redevelopment and security infrastructures, monetary and political aspirations are closely connected. Take for example the Greece debt crisis and their need for a new bailout, essentially a financial issue but it undoubtedly has multiple repercussive effects on their military and other services from supportive nations. This also has an effect on the Eurozone and from a criminologist perspective, Greece’s capabilities in providing effective support for Europol. I consider the world as a human body, with finance being the blood and politics being the nervous system, one cannot live without the other. I put forth a point of discussion, given the current power of the IMF, how would national security infrastructures generally be affected?
LikeLiked by 1 person