Cannabis Prohibition in the Middle East During the 1920s

Pre-1920s: Cannabis in the Middle East Before Prohibition

Cannabis use in the Middle East dates back at least to the medieval period. Strong evidence^[1] Hashish and cannabis preparations were consumed widely—in coffeehouses, private homes, and among merchants and scholars—across Ottoman territories and the Arab world. Use was not uniformly endorsed by Islamic law scholars, but it was not systematically forbidden either. Weak / limited^[2] Some jurists cited traditions to prohibit it; others permitted it as a matter of individual conscience. The Ottoman state taxed cannabis cultivation and did not criminalize possession or sale in most periods before 1900. Weak / limited^[3]

In Egypt, cannabis (locally called hashish, kif, or qinnab) was consumed openly in the 19th century and early 20th. Coffeehouses served both cannabis and tobacco, and the substance was available in markets. The Egyptian state collected revenue from cultivation and trade rather than suppressing it. Weak / limited Similarly, in what became Mandatory Palestine, Syria, and Lebanon, cannabis was a known crop and article of commerce, though not uniformly cultivated or consumed at the same intensity across all regions.

The widespread use was reflected in cultural products—literature, poetry, and later film—that portrayed cannabis consumption as a normal feature of urban and rural life. Anecdote This tolerance lasted until external forces—primarily European colonial administrations and international treaty obligations—reshaped local policy.

World War I and Colonial Transition: The Moment of Change

The collapse of the Ottoman Empire after World War I and the establishment of League of Nations mandates fundamentally altered the political landscape. Egypt, while nominally independent after 1922, remained under British influence. Palestine, Syria, Lebanon, and Iraq became mandated territories under French or British administration. Strong evidence^[4] These colonial powers brought their own narcotics policies and were answerable to the emerging international drug-control framework centered in Geneva.

The League of Nations, particularly its Advisory Committee on Traffic in Opium and Other Dangerous Drugs (established 1921), began pushing member states to criminalize cannabis as part of a broader international narcotics-control agenda. Strong evidence^[5] This committee was dominated by European and North American representatives who had little knowledge of local cannabis traditions and who believed that strict criminalization was the model for all drug policy worldwide.

British colonial administrators in Palestine, Iraq, and Egypt; French administrators in Syria and Lebanon; and the emerging Turkish Republic all faced pressure to align their drug laws with the international standard. Criminalization was framed not as a reversal of local practice but as "modernization" and "public health"—a rhetoric that masked the subordination of local autonomy to Western policy preferences.

Legislative Prohibition: Egypt, Palestine, Syria, and Iraq in the 1920s

Egypt was among the first Middle Eastern territories to formally criminalize cannabis. In 1925, Egypt passed the "Law Regulating the Traffic in Morphine and Cannabis," which criminalized possession and sale. Weak / limited^[6] The law was presented to the Egyptian Parliament as necessary to meet international obligations under the 1925 Geneva Opium Convention, though the local political debate also included concerns about public order and colonial anxiety about stimulant use among lower-income urban populations.

In Mandatory Palestine, British administrators introduced cannabis prohibition through amendments to Ottoman-era penal statutes. The 1926 Criminal Code Ordinance explicitly prohibited cannabis possession and cultivation for non-industrial purposes. Weak / limited Similar bans were imposed in Syria and Lebanon under French mandate, codified in the late 1920s penal ordinances.

Iraq, under British mandate until 1932, criminalized cannabis through the 1925 Penal Code, which classified cannabis (hashish) alongside opium and cocaine. Weak / limited^[7] The code prescribed prison sentences and fines for possession, cultivation, and sale.

In Turkey, the new Turkish Republic—seeking to modernize and align with the West—criminalized cannabis in its 1926 Penal Code. Weak / limited This move was particularly significant because it represented a deliberate break from Ottoman tolerance and signaled Atatürk's commitment to Western legal and medical standards.

These laws were not popularly driven. Anecdote In many cases, they were imposed or heavily influenced by colonial administrators with minimal local consultation. They appeared rapidly, in parallel, across multiple jurisdictions—a pattern that reflects external coordination rather than independent policy development within each territory.

International Pressure and the 1925 Geneva Opium Convention

The 1925 Geneva International Opium Convention established an international framework obliging signatory states to criminalize cannabis. Strong evidence For the first time in international law, cannabis was classified as a dangerous drug equivalent to opium and cocaine. The convention required states to prevent production, sale, and distribution except for "medical and scientific purposes." Strong evidence

Middle Eastern territories and states—whether colonial dependencies or nominally independent—faced direct and indirect pressure to ratify and implement the convention. Colonial administrators simply imposed the standards on their mandates. For Egypt and Turkey, ratification was a condition of recognition as a modernizing, law-abiding state within the international system. Weak / limited

None of this pressure originated from public health crises in the Middle East. No major regional outbreak of hashish addiction or social harm had prompted the international community to act. Instead, the classification reflected the moral and policy preferences of European and North American reformers and was applied globally with little regard for local context or prior regulatory experience.

Enforcement and Resistance: 1920s–1930s

Enforcement of the new laws was uneven. In cities with strong colonial police and courts—Cairo, Baghdad, Damascus, Jerusalem, Beirut—arrests for cannabis possession occurred regularly and were reported in press accounts. Weak / limited^[8] In rural areas, enforcement was sporadic and dependent on local cooperation with authorities.

Resistance took several forms. Some cannabis merchants and cultivators continued their trade, shifting to underground networks. Some users abandoned public consumption in coffeehouses but continued private use. Anecdote In Egypt and Palestine, criminal syndicates soon emerged to supply the illegal market, a consequence that did not occur under the previous regulatory regime.

Intellectual and cultural resistance was limited during the 1920s. Unlike in some Western countries, where cannabis reform had vocal advocates, the Middle East did not produce organized protest against the new prohibition laws in this period. Anecdote One reason was that the laws were presented as international obligations and signs of modernization—objecting seemed to place one outside the progressive camp. Another was that cannabis users were not a politically organized constituency.

Some Islamic legal scholars and reformers publicly endorsed the prohibition, reinterpreting traditional Islamic jurisprudence to align with international law. Weak / limited^[9] This legitimized the bans in terms of religious authority, even though the laws originated in secular Western policy. Over time, the claim that Islam forbade cannabis became doctrine, obscuring the fact that this interpretation had been marginal or contested for centuries.

Myth and Narrative: How History Was Rewritten

A key myth developed during and after the 1920s: that prohibition was either a traditional Islamic principle or a necessary response to a local cannabis epidemic. Anecdote Neither is historically accurate.

The claim that Islam inherently forbids cannabis is selective. Medieval Islamic jurists debated the legality of cannabis intoxication vigorously. Some cited the Qur'anic prohibition on khamr (wine/intoxicants) to forbid hashish. Others argued that cannabis did not fit the category of khamr or that moderate use was permissible. Weak / limited^[2] This diversity of opinion persisted into the Ottoman period. The shift toward uniform prohibition in Islamic jurisprudence occurred during the 20th century—driven partly by colonialism and the international drug-control regime, and secondarily rationalized by selective reinterpretation of classical sources.

The narrative of a local epidemic is also without strong support. Before the 1920s, there is no evidence of widespread addiction crises or social breakdown attributed to cannabis in Middle Eastern cities. Weak / limited The moral panic about cannabis was imported from Europe and North America, where it was often racialized and connected to immigration and lower-income urban populations. This panic was then retrofitted onto the Middle Eastern context with little empirical basis.

A third myth, propagated in colonial accounts and later Western scholarship, held that Middle Eastern cannabis use was primarily among the poor and socially marginal. Disputed Contemporary accounts and later historical research show that cannabis was consumed across social classes—by merchants, scholars, musicians, and laborers—and was not uniquely associated with poverty or criminality.

These myths became embedded in how prohibition was justified and taught. By the 1930s, cannabis prohibition in the Middle East was presented as both authentically Islamic and a response to social necessity—when in fact it was an imposed external policy rationalized after the fact by religious reinterpretation and selective historical narrative.

Long-Term Impact and the 1961 Framework

The prohibition established in the 1920s became the legal baseline for all Middle Eastern states. When the UN Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs was drafted in 1961, Strong evidence cannabis prohibition was already embedded in national laws across the region. Strong evidence States simply ratified the convention as an extension of existing policy rather than as a novel commitment.

This history matters because it means that cannabis prohibition in the Middle East is not primarily rooted in local legal, medical, or religious tradition. It is a 20th-century import, initially enforced by colonial power and later sustained by international treaty obligation and national bureaucratic inertia. The religious and cultural frameworks used to justify it today were constructed partly during and partly after the imposition of prohibition.

Understanding this history reveals that contemporary cannabis policy in the Middle East—which remains among the world's strictest—is not an expression of timeless Islamic or local values but a contingent product of colonialism, international power dynamics, and selective historical reinterpretation.

Sources

How this page was made

Related

• 1961 Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs — The UN treaty that locked cannabis into the strictest international drug control schedule...
• Cannabis Culture in the Middle East During the 1970s — How Lebanese hash production peaked, Afghan resin reached Western markets, and regional cr...
• Cannabis Culture in the Middle East During the 1990s — A decade when Lebanese hash production collapsed under state crackdowns while regional con...
• Cannabis in Middle Eastern Film, 1900–1999 — How Egyptian and Lebanese cinema portrayed hashish across a century of prohibition, war, a...
• Cannabis Policy in the Middle East During the 1950s — A decade defined by prohibition crackdowns and international drug treaties, not legalizati...
• UN Drug Treaties and Cannabis — How three international conventions shaped global cannabis prohibition, and what the 2020...