You are watching: What influence did the breakup of the soviet union have on the russian mafia?
After the fall of the Soviet Union, Russian organised crime (ROC) showed up to flourish ‘like mushroom after the rain’ (Holmes, 2008:1012). However, this was not a brand-new post-Cold battle phenomenon. Rather, ROC had been arising as one institution, indigenous institutions and also in collaboration with organizations for decades, and now poses a large threat come them. This institutional threat, follow to Allum and Siebert, ‘is the result of the USSR’s history’ (2003:18). Provided this, I have chosen historical institutionalism (HI) together the most proper lens through which come analyse the development of ROC. The very first section that this essay will synopsis my theoretical framework and chosen definition. The complying with three sections will analyse the interaction relationships in between institutions from the beforehand Soviet and Brezhnev periods to the post-Soviet era in bespeak to recognize the evolution of ROC into an institutionalised triangle relationship in between crime, politics and business. Ultimately, in the last section of this essay, i argue the this institutionalised triangular partnership which has concerned dominate state, polite society, politics and also the economy, now poses a grave threat to the advancement of Russian democracy.
I begin by outlining my theoretical framework: historic institutionalism. Follow to Fioretos (2011:369), the focus of hello scholarship is top top ‘when and also how historic processes form political outcomes’. This definition of temporality is reflect by Sanders (2008) who argues that the is the construction, maintenance and adaptation the institutional frameworks gradually over time the is vital to HI. These institutional adaptations occur, according to Friedland and also Alford (1991), as a result of interactions between multiple establishments which do multiple logics accessible to actors who manipulate these conflict to develop institutional development. This reasonable is reflect by Orren and Skowronek (1994:320) who argue that ‘institutions, both individually and also collectively, juxtapose different logics of political order, each through their own temporal underpinnings’ resulting in institutional changes, and that ‘change along one time heat affects order along the others’ (ibid). In various other words, as suggested by Thelen (1999), whilst organizations within society emerge from various historical contexts, the is the interactions between them that permit for their common development. And also so, offered what the literature has put forth, my historical institutionalist analysis of ROC chooses to examine just how the historical processes the the Soviet and post-Soviet era, with particular focus top top Russia’s tumultuous financial context, have helped with interactions in between multiple formal and also informal institutions and how these interactions have shaped politics outcomes and also led come institutional adaptations end time, at some point resulting in the advancement of one institutionalised triangle relationship between organised crime, business and also politics.
Next, return Abadinsky (2013:2) rightly says that ‘there is no typically accepted definition of hold crime’, this essay will adhere to the following an interpretation offered by Finckenauer and Voronin:
‘Organized crime is crime cursed by criminal institutions whose existence has actually continuity with time and across crimes, and also that use organized violence and corruption to facilitate their criminal activities. These criminal organizations have varying capacities come inflict economic, physical, psychological, and also societal harm. The higher their volume to harm, the higher the peril they pose to society.’ (Finckenauer and also Voronin, 2001:2)
This definition has been chosen due to the fact that it highlights organised crime’s use of political corruption and its affect on the economy and civil society, all of which space important materials of this essay. Finally, it note the dangers that criminal groups pose to culture as a whole through their volume to inflict this various hurts which in the concluding ar shall be understood as the peril that ROC poses come the formation of a democratic society.
In this section, I begin my analysis of ROC in the at an early stage Soviet era which observed the rise and also fall that a criminal institution called the vory v zakone or ‘thieves in law’: a class of professional criminals that ruled the criminal underworld after the 1917 revolution and followed a peculiar ‘system of cumulative beliefs’ (Varese, 2002:7). Varese (2002) suggests that the vory’s increase was a product that the Gulag prison institutions, which were themselves the product of central state institutions. Here, we have the right to identify a domino impact of institutional advancement which i argue started with the reaction of central state establishments to the unstable and economically uncertain historical context that the time. The political outcome: Lenin’s new Economic policy which placed huge emphasis on forced labour camps come stimulate financial growth and also which began a procedure of gradual change within Bolshevik establishments to arbitrary detain large numbers of civilization (Hosford et al., 2006). This was more exacerbated under Stalin who, in the surname of financial development, introduced a ‘tightening that the political order in the so late 1920s’ causing a ‘purge of all criminality’ (Frisby, 1998:32). Here, main institutions’ raised interaction v the Gulag institutions, propelled by economic preferences, brought about the full labour camps indigenous which the vory emerged. However, although enhanced prison populations accelerated industrialisation, this number easily expanded beyond the state’s capacity to police them. This would at some point lead come their decline because, together Skarbek (2012) argues, when prison populations come to be too high, an especially with a large proportion of first-time inmates as was viewed in the early on Soviet era, rule of plot and details norms start to fail. In this case, whereas vows of silence and mistrust of the authorities were the many inherent attributes of the vory institution (Varese, 2002:15), things began to change and it is adapted in the 1940s during WWII. Because that this institutional adaptation, Sokolov cites 3 reasons. The first being ‘firm and also steady pressure from the state
In this following section, i analyse the Brezhnev era and argue that the failures of state institutions to respond come the financial context result in economic stagnation. This led to increased institutional interactions between legitimate structures and criminal groups: one interactive partnership which centred on the profits acquired from the shadow economy and also which constructed upon the pre-established institutional cooperation described in the previous section. During this era, a decrease in industrial growth, boosted spending on defence and also excessive centralisation all led to the declining economic power of the Soviet Union which, follow to Gregory and Stuart (1993:146), to be ‘the most vital feature the the Brezhnev era’. This poor economic context resulted in various politics outcomes, most importantly, the emergence and rapid dependency of establishments upon a farming shadow economic situation which emerged in bespeak to offset shortages in ~ the official economy. This was promoted by the compliance the Soviet authorities and government bureaucracy who, fuelled by a desire for profit, exploited the zero economy and ‘left no stones unturned in seeking methods to line their pockets’ by extorting money from zero businessmen for security of your illegal operations (Finckenauer and also Voronin, 2001:6). However, the authorities were no the just ones exploiting the shadow economy. Follow to Sokolov (2004), as federal government officials began providing this defense ‘from above’ in exchange because that bribes, criminal groups also began providing ‘protection services’ to zero businessmen ‘from below’. The result of this to be a sharp increase in the interactions between formal and informal institutions. Here, the is necessary to the highlight the duty of civil society in fuelling this phenomenon. Together Laqueur (1992:510) notes, the worst outcome of financial stagnation was not a autumn in living standards but ‘the ns of morale among people, the ns of attention in occupational
In this section, I examine the advancement of the ‘three-tiered pyramid’ right into an institutionalised triangle relationship in between crime, businessmen and politicians in post-Soviet Russia as a result of its imperfect shift to the industry economy, beginning in the 1980s v Gorbachev’s perestroika reforms. This ar will independently examine the three very interdependent relationship that type this triangle: the business-criminal nexus, the political-criminal nexus, and the political-business nexus (see Godson, 2003). First, however, it is necessary to to mark the historical and also economic procedures that started this transition. As previously described, corruption, crime and apathy in civil culture were coming to be increasingly normal aspects of Russian life under Brezhnev and also hopes of corresponding Western economic situations went unfulfilled. This ended up being the catalyst for economic reform under Gorbachev, a political outcome of the institutional interaction of the Brezhnev era which Plekhanov (2003:79) suggests aimed at bringing the shadow economic situation into the open and transforming it right into a ingredient of a viable market-socialist system. However, Gorbachev and his supporters ‘badly underestimate the power potential amassed by the frameworks of stop crime’ (ibid:80) and simply gotten rid of restraints on zero businessmen, corrupt officials and criminal teams who, follow to Finckenauer and also Voronin (2001:7), to be perfectly put to make use of their relationships and an abilities in order come conduct business successfully. Adhering to the fall of the Soviet Union and Yeltsin’s ascension to power, complete liberalisation from central control and also significantly weakened formal institutions led come the institutional adaptation of every component in this ‘three-tiered pyramid’ in conjunction through the others to end up being a triangle relationship based upon dependency.
The an initial facet of this triangle come be questioned here is the criminal-business nexus which arisen from privatisation and also the lack of a mechanism of plainly defined home rights. Firstly, privatisation meant that racketeers suddenly had actually an financial stake in the businesses they were protecting and criminal groups started entering into long-term financial partnerships (Sokolov, 2004), ultimately coming to be dependent on businesses. This produced a ‘grey zone’ in ~ the organization world which, follow to Godson (2003:274), is typical whenever societies experience significant changes in the institutional framework of the politics economy, as arisen under Gorbachev. He says that the interactions between subsystems become fortified and also members that the criminal subsystem will attempt come transform their criminal identification into images of legit businessmen. Secondly, the state’s i can not qualify to force legal home rights throughout this era expected that businesses maintained a dependency on ‘protection rackets’, much like under Brezhnev. However, in post-Soviet Russia these services were extended to legit businesses. In short, change to the market economic climate resulted in the tightening the the interaction relationship between crime and also business together organised criminal teams ‘quickly moved to come to be business partner in the newly created commercial enterprise while preserving their function as extralegal enforcers’ (Sokolov, 2004:70). This mirrors the ‘active assimilative’ stage of Rawlinson’s model which she argues ‘has proven to be the most far-reaching for the advance of stop crime in Russia’ (2002:246). In this stage, criminal groups proactively participate in the legit economy creating a grey area in between formal and informal organizations which severely weakens the former, ‘rendering them increasingly impotent to curb criminal influence’ (ibid), therefore strengthening the dominance of ROC end the state and the economic situation through the criminal-business nexus.
The 2nd facet of this triangle is the political-criminal nexus. Cheloukhine and also Haberfeld argue that among the most important political outcomes of stop crime’s development into the privatised economic situation was ‘its connection to corruption officials at different levels that the state structure authorities: from regional to federal’ (2011:102). In ~ the neighborhood level, plenty of government officials discovered it easier, safer and also more profitable to accept bribes than to hit crime and also corruption, or to properly enforce the ascendancy of legislation (Remington, 2015). Holmes (2008) contends that countless former state public official who had actually lost their positions v the transition to post-Soviet Russia were desperate for income, and also thus much more likely to communicate in corrupt activities. Police officers additionally began to progressively see corruption as perfectly agree in certain circumstances (Beck and Lee, 2002). Whether fuelled by profit or apathy, these actions reflect a tightening that the political-criminal relationship at the neighborhood level which additional undermined the state’s capacity to deter crime, thus fortifying the ‘informal society contract’ in ~ civil culture that urged indifference towards crime and corruption. At the an ext federal level, ROC’s relocate towards legitimate service came with new economic power which, in turn, listed political power and fortified the political-criminal partnership as it enabled criminal teams to deal directly with the state and assume governmental features in bespeak to manage the sector (Finckenauer & Voronin, 2001). The post-Soviet political-criminal relationship pertained to reflect what Handelman (1997) explains as the ‘comrade criminal’: a corrupt functionary who converts political strength into economic power with energetic assistance the the criminal. Here, ROC’s considerable use the its relationships within the political system and formal organizations from the neighborhood to the commonwealth level to protect and also promote criminal tasks became possible when it started to dominate legitimate businesses. This reflects complete domination the the political system and also state and has resulted in the increased apathy of civil society, the use of state funds for criminal gain, and in part cases, complete symbiosis between the political and also criminal spheres as criminals begin to achieve positions of power and directly influence state policy (Finckenauer & Voronin, 2001).
The third relationship to be examined right here is the political-business nexus. Together formal state institutions weakened and also handed manage over to exclusive enterprises under Yeltsin, oligarchs concerned share the space at the optimal of society whilst the political upstream struggled come maintain supremacy over economic transactions. According to Plekhanov (2003:84), the result of this details institutional adaptation was that government officials started to realise that the vital to success was to be found not in state institutions yet in the exclusive sector, top to boosted interactions between high-level government officials and large businessmen sustained by the desire for profit. However, organised crime’s takeover of legit businesses following the loss of the Soviet Union, as formerly discussed, also resulted in Russian transitional businesses appearing firmly connected to the criminal world (Cheloukhine and Haberfeld, 2011:45). The tight links occurred by oligarchs v both state and crime is no more evident than in the situation of Boris Berezovsky (see Klebnikov, 2001). In summary, each relationship within this triangle constitutes a type of institutional interaction that emerged as a result of Russia’s imperfect transition to a privatised market economy and its weak, inefficient and also mistrusted official institutions. What has actually been described over has now relocated past ‘passive assimilation’ and also ‘active assimilation’, and has gone into the ‘proactive’ step based approximately political-criminal-business nexuses where synergy between the 3 spheres occurs and organised crime deserve to blend ‘chameleon-like’ right into all institutional structures.
Here, I trace this procedure of triangular institutional development within the Tambovskaya corridor of St Petersburg which was created in the so late 1980s and which follow to Cheloukhine and also Sergevnin (2009:180) ‘were one of the an initial criminal teams to begin emerging tight contacts with legal businesses’. Whereas, in the early 1990s, it was simply one of many racketeering operations and also had just just started to undertaking into commercial activities, Volkov (2002) note that together the 1990s progressed and also post-Soviet Russia began to take shape, Tambovskaya started expanding. This was specifically evident in the energy sector and also it controlled to capitalise top top the fuel and energy supply problems the city was encountering with the help of city management and associated businessmen, ultimately taking control of Petersburg Fuel company (PTK) (Volkov, 2014). Hefty investment into legal businesses and sectors was furthered in 1995, when Vladamir Kumarin consolidated power over the criminal organisation after many years of interior fighting and ‘the structure of the organisation started changing’ (Cheloukhine and also Sergevnin, 2009:181). This institutional advancement is reflected by Sokolov’s research on the evolution of ROC where he conducts an interview with a ‘former’ Tambov corridor member that stated: ‘in the past five years, us bandits have tried to come to be legitimate <…> small-time crime and extortion no much longer pays when you have the right to run your very own business and also establish an excellent relations with federal government officials’ (2004:72). This reflects the fortification of both the criminal-business nexus and also the political-criminal nexus. Political-criminal symbiosis is noted by Volkov (2002) who claims that countless Tambov corridor members also went on to join local legislatures in an effort to strengthen your political protection. The tightening of this political-criminal relationship was likewise furthered through the development of criminal-business nexuses in which this group utilised legit businesses together a huge resource of both economic and politics power. Most notably ~ 1994 when Putin, that was rumoured to have had close relations with Kumarin and also the Tambov gang, forgive PTK the prestigious best to be sole supplier of petrol to St Petersburg and also the gang started to flourish and expand that ‘army the managers and officials <…> into business and politics’ (Volkov, 2002:113), through Kumarin actually becoming the vice chairman of PTK in 1998, although at some point being sentenced because that fraud and money laundering in 2009. In short, an examination of the Tamboskaya group is an examination of ROC’s institutionalised triangle relationship. This team reflects how Russia’s formal institutional weaknesses and also economic instability adhering to the fallen of the Soviet Union left a ‘power vacuum’ that was easily filled by hold crime. The imperfect change allowed the Tambovskaya gang to pass through legitimate businesses and also tighten the criminal-business nexus. V the criminal-business nexus, the Tambov corridor gained far-reaching economic and political power, was able to affect the political-business nexus, and fortify the political-criminal nexus. The amount of these institutional interactions shows the advancement of ROC and also the consolidation the Rawlinson’s (2002) ‘proactive’ phase. However, in recent years the Tambovskaya gang has started to decline, mainly as result of internal disputes which have actually led come the emigration of numerous former leaders to other areas of the world, such together Spain, whereby they have started expanding their global reach (Volkov, 2014).
This brings us onto the phenomenon that transnational ROC, the expansion of i m sorry Shelley (1995) suggests has been recent and rapid and is a product of Russia’s post-socialist financial context. Rapid economic globalisation since the finish of the Cold war has provided rise come massive methods for criminals to do their businesses prosper (UNODC, 2010). This very first led to the growth of ROC into the brand-new states of the previous Soviet Union, and secondly right into Asia where they functioned in teamwork with Chinese ‘triads’, prior to moving into the West and the Americas. Follow to Bagley (2001), the growth of ROC right into the ameri is by much the most troubling phenomenon that poses the greatest an obstacle to democracy. He suggests that ROC’s development from formal institutional weaknesses makes other weak states desirable targets for transnational ROC enterprises, particularly those through weak formal establishments such together corrupt and ineffective legal, regulation enforcement and also political institutions. This is specifically true in Latin America and also the Caribbean whereby ROC is broadening its tasks to incorporate not just global money laundering and financial crimes, but also many creates of trafficking (Finckenauer, 2011), efficiently stunting the development of democracy in numerous of these transitioning states. The Tambovskaya gang, for example, in addition to many various other ROC groups, have increased into a wide selection of illegal tasks in Mexico, which incorporate providing domestic criminal teams with access to illicit international markets, money-laundering and illegal arms sources, every one of which ‘could transform them into significant impediments to financial growth and serious dangers to democratic consolidation and also long-run stability at home’ (Bagley, 2001:34). In short, transnational ROC is a rapidly expanding, relatively new phenomenon that transitioning states have to now confront and also which poses one enormous an obstacle to democracy.
In enhancement to the danger posed come democracy in other transitioning claims as defined above, in this final section ns aim to tackle the question: what difficulty does ROC pose to Russian democracy? If we recognize liberal democracy together a procedure towards liberty and equality completed through the state, civil society and political systems (Allum and also Siebert, 2003:16), climate this essay, which has demonstrated the penetration that ROC right into all three crucial areas, clearly argues that Russian democracy is in dig danger. As previously discussed, ROC and also its triangular relationship, i m sorry has efficiently penetrated legitimate businesses and criminalised the political system, damages the legitimacy of formal institutions and weakens polite society. This ‘grey’ area of business created through ROC and also the tolerance of and also collusion through criminal frameworks (i.e. Pollution of state, civil culture and politics systems) constitutes a ‘major danger to the society fabric’ (Muncie and also McLaughlin, 2001:274). In order to combat this, Putin has actually been implementing a new ‘reform authoritarianism’. Whilst Plekhanov (2003) says that this can potentially be reliable in combatting the many dangerous develops of ROC such as drugs and also human trafficking and also contract murders and money-laundering and cybercrime and also may strengthen formal state institutions somewhat, ‘it retards the advancement of Russian democracy by seeking to reduce the freedom of civil society institutions’ and also does very tiny to combat corruption that the politics system. Therefore, although the state and its formal institutions would be strengthened, the political mechanism would remain extremely corrupt and also civil culture would be weakened even further. Before Russian democracy have the right to stand a chance, the weaknesses of the economy, the political system and also civil society which allow ROC to flourish must it is in tackled, or the entire Russian state will certainly be swallowed totality by crime and also corruption.
In conclusion, this essay has actually demonstrated that the expansion of Russian organised crime poses a vast threat come the development of democracy in both the Russian state itself and other transitioning states roughly the globe. This can be attributed come its institutionalised triangular partnership with the business world and the political device which mirrors Rawlinson’s (2002) ‘proactive’ step of her ‘Chameleon Syndrome’ model whereby institutional interactions in between informal criminal institutions and also formal establishments becomes so constant and comparable that they end up being intertwined and create a series of nexuses. I have argued here the this relationship emerged from the historic processes the Russia’s tumultuous economic context wherein industrialisation, stagnation and also a series of revolutionary sparked a collection of institutional interactions in between formal and informal organizations leading to their ultimate development. The result of this was the by the end of the 1990s, ‘there was no state or any type of segment of the economic situation which had not to be under some regulate from hold criminal groups’ (Cheloukhine and Haberfeld, 2011:175). This penetration of the state and the economic situation by stop crime additionally resulted in a very indifferent and apathetic civil culture with a huge mistrust of dilute formal institutions, which Plekhanov suggests is the central weakness the impedes the growth of Russian democracy given that ‘without active citizen involvement, campaigns against organised crime and also corruption will lug only limited results’ (2003:87). What this tells united state is the ROC’s penetration the the state, politics and also economy through its institutionalised triangular relationship has actually resulted in state-tolerated corruption, a weak civil culture and a ‘grey zone’ that business, all of which poses a huge challenge for democracy. Together Sokolov (2004) correct states, ‘the reality that plenty of criminals have actually turned in their guns for briefcases makes them no much less a threat to the development of Russian democracy’.
Abadinsky H (2013). Organized Crime. Third ed. Cengage Learning.
Bagley B (2001). Globalization and transnational arranged crime: the Russian mafia in Latin America and also the Caribbean. Available from: https://www.as.miami.edu/media/college-of-arts-and-sciences/content-assets/international-studies/documents/publications/Bagley%20GLOBALIZATION%202.pdf (accessed 25 April 2016).
Beck A and Lee R (2002). Attitudes to corruption among Russian police officers and also trainees. Crime, Law and also Social Change 38(4): 357–372.
Cheloukhine S and also Haberfeld grandfather (2011). Russian organized Corruption Networks and also their worldwide Trajectories. Springer science & business Media.
Cheloukhine S and also Sergevnin V (2009). Fads in local Criminal Groups and Their manage over the Russian Economy. Law Enforcement executive Forum 9(2): 175–88.
Dodd LC and also Jillson CC (1994). The Dynamics that American Politics: Approaches and Interpretations. Westview Press.
Finckenauer JO ‘Russian Transnational organized Crime and also Human Trafficking’. In Kyle D and also Koslowski R (2011) Global human being Smuggling: comparative Perspectives. JHU Press.
Finckenauer JO and also Voronin YA (2001). The danger of Russian organized crime. U.S. Dept. That Justice, Office of justice Programs, nationwide Institute that Justice.
Fioretos O (2011). Historic Institutionalism in worldwide Relations. International Organization 65(02): 367–399.
Friedland R and also Alford R (1991). Bringing society Back In: Symbols, Practices and Institutional Contradictions. In: Powell W and Dimaggio p (eds), The new Institutionalism in organizational Analysis, college Of Chicago Press, pp. 232–263. Accessible from: http://www.amazon.ca/exec/obidos/redirect?tag=citeulike09-20&path=ASIN/0226677095 (accessed 10 April 2016).
Frisby T (1998). The climb of stop crime in Russia: that is roots and social significance. Europe-Asia Studies 50(1): 27–49.
Godson R (2003). Menace come Society: Political-criminal Colllaboration roughly the World. Transaction Publishers.
Gregory PR and also Stuart RC (1993). Soviet and Post-Soviet financial Structure and Performance. 5th Revised execution edition. New York, N.Y.: Longman.
Handelman S (1997). Comrade Criminal: Russia’s brand-new Mafiya. Yale college Press.
Holmes together (2008). Corruption and Organised Crime in Putin’s Russia. Europe-Asia Studies 60(6): 1011–1031.
Hosford D, Kachurin P and Lamont T (2006). Gulag: Soviet prison Camps and also Their Legacy. U.S. Nationwide Park Service.
Klebnikov ns (2001). Godfather the the Kremlin: The decrease of Russia in the period of Gangster Capitalism. Orlando: Mariner Books.
Laqueur W (1992). Europe in ours Time – A History: 1945-1992. First edition. New York: Penguin.
Muncie J and McLaughlin E (2001). The trouble of Crime. SAGE.
Plekhanov S ‘Organized crime, business and the State in post-communist Russia’. In Allum F and Siebert R (2003) Organized crime and the challenge to democracy. Routledge/ECPR studies in europe political science ; 28, London ; new York: Routledge.
Rawlinson MP (1998). Hunting the Chameleon: the difficulties of identifying Russian arranged crime. College of London.
Remington TF (2015). Politics in Russia. Routledge.
Rhodes RAW, Binder SA and also Rockman BA (2008). The Oxford Handbook of political Institutions. OUP Oxford.
Shelley LI (1995). Transnational arranged Crime: An brewing Threat come the Nation-State? Journal of global Affairs 48(2): 463–489.
Skarbek D (2012). Jail gangs, norms, and also organizations. Journal of Economic actions & Organization 82(1): 96–109.
Sokolov V (2004). From firearms to briefcases: The advancement of Russian organized crime. World plan Journal 21(1): 68–74.
Thelen K (1999). Historical institutionalism in compare politics. Annual review Of political Science 2: 369–404.
UNODC (2010). The Globalization the Crime: A Transnational organized Crime threat Assessment. United countries publication. Easily accessible from: https://www.unodc.org/documents/data-and-analysis/tocta/TOCTA_Report_2010_low_res.pdf (accessed 26 April 2016).
Varese F (1994). ‘Is Sicily the Future of Russia? personal Protection and also the rise of the Russian Mafia’ Archives européenes de sociologie XXXV, pp.224-58 in Galeotti M (ed.) (2002) Russian and also Post-Soviet arranged Crime. Aldershot, England ; Brookfield, Vt.: Routledge.
Volkov V (2002). Violent Entrepreneurs: The usage of pressure in the do of Russian Capitalism. Cornell college Press.
See more: What Is Playready Pc Runtime X86, What Is Playready Pc Runtime Amd64
Volkov V ‘The Russian Mafia: Rise and also Extinction’ in Paoli L. (2014) The Oxford Handbook of organized Crime. Oxford college Press.
Written by: Jessica Xiao created at: college of Bath created for: Dr Felia Allum date written: 04/2016