I would suggest the solution is NOT abandoning AML efforts, as many corporations would like to suggest (though they dare not publicly).

Comparing number of opticians to number of AML bureaucrats is a non sequitur.

Better to have a system whereby remittances can be reviewed for money-laundering. Possibly, there would need to be an AML fee added to such remittances. The truth is that it IS more expensive for banks to do business in countries with risky infrastructures.

It may have helped this article to interview a couple of different people. I admire Charles Kenny -- he's certainly a bright guy and has a passion for improving the lot of the developing world. To realize his dream of equalizing opportunity geographically, though, the developing world needs to actually develop, so that the ML risks can be equalized.