> many high-value art thefts in the past ten to fifteen years has been the potential for stolen works to be used as collateral linked to drug deals.
This is alluded to, twice, but not explained. Is this a form of money laundering, or a deal at a distance - contraband is delivered in country A, artwork in country B? I don’t see how “collateral” plays a part, unless one party “loans” drugs in exchange for artwork, and the second party pays off the loan and recovers the artwork after selling the drugs onward.