Manchester University Press
3 Global perils I
Abstract
In the interwar period a multi-ethnic heterogeneity of groups became involved in drug smuggling. Chinese and Greek smugglers entered the illegal drug market and succeeded in building up successful tactics against state strategies to enforce the new drug regulatory regime. Chinese opium smuggling connected supply sources in the Middle East (Iran, Turkey) with the port towns of Europe, and sometimes collaborated with the Greek smuggling networks originating in the former Ottoman Empire. Both networks could successfully operate because of their relatively closed homogeneous ethnic and social composition; their ability to use global maritime connections, routes, and smuggling hubs through their networks in communities overseas; and because of the limitation of competing sources of supply in legal production. Other contributing factors for the Chinese were their role in the co-management of crime and labour together with Dutch law enforcement agencies and shipping companies, as well as their ability to connect to the demand side of Chinese migrants who lived in a culture of opium smoking both as a source of relaxation after work and as stimulant during work. The Greeks were not so much embedded in Dutch society as capable of establishing international connections with other ethnic groups such as the Chinese and the native Dutch. The interwar period shows the pragmatic cooperation between trafficking networks of different ethnic backgrounds that is another characteristic of criminal anarchy.
Abstract
In the interwar period a multi-ethnic heterogeneity of groups became involved in drug smuggling. Chinese and Greek smugglers entered the illegal drug market and succeeded in building up successful tactics against state strategies to enforce the new drug regulatory regime. Chinese opium smuggling connected supply sources in the Middle East (Iran, Turkey) with the port towns of Europe, and sometimes collaborated with the Greek smuggling networks originating in the former Ottoman Empire. Both networks could successfully operate because of their relatively closed homogeneous ethnic and social composition; their ability to use global maritime connections, routes, and smuggling hubs through their networks in communities overseas; and because of the limitation of competing sources of supply in legal production. Other contributing factors for the Chinese were their role in the co-management of crime and labour together with Dutch law enforcement agencies and shipping companies, as well as their ability to connect to the demand side of Chinese migrants who lived in a culture of opium smoking both as a source of relaxation after work and as stimulant during work. The Greeks were not so much embedded in Dutch society as capable of establishing international connections with other ethnic groups such as the Chinese and the native Dutch. The interwar period shows the pragmatic cooperation between trafficking networks of different ethnic backgrounds that is another characteristic of criminal anarchy.
Kapitel in diesem Buch
- Front matter i
- Contents v
- List of figures vi
- Acknowledgements vii
- 1 Introduction 1
- 2 The interwar period 23
- 3 Global perils I 41
- 4 Cannabis, counterculture, and criminals 74
- 5 Global perils II 110
- 6 The expansion of the cannabis trade after 1976 153
- 7 Global perils III 188
- 8 The floodgates of criminal anarchy 215
- 9 Conclusion 266
- Appendix 272
- Bibliography 275
- Index 293
Kapitel in diesem Buch
- Front matter i
- Contents v
- List of figures vi
- Acknowledgements vii
- 1 Introduction 1
- 2 The interwar period 23
- 3 Global perils I 41
- 4 Cannabis, counterculture, and criminals 74
- 5 Global perils II 110
- 6 The expansion of the cannabis trade after 1976 153
- 7 Global perils III 188
- 8 The floodgates of criminal anarchy 215
- 9 Conclusion 266
- Appendix 272
- Bibliography 275
- Index 293
