This article examines the transformative work of Anglo-Iranian oil in international law helping to constitute a peculiar distinct ion between civilized/uncivilized and developed/developing. The Middle East was a central site for political intervention through international law and the new Bretton Woods Institutions of the mid - 20th century that sought to redefine the powers of former colonies as new states in the process of decolonization. Historical scholarship has not addressed the infrastructure of this socio-legal relationship as a political project. Political histories of Iran in the Mosaddegh period discuss the legal aspects of the oil nationalization crisis in terms of their impact on the 1953 coup d’etat and domestic political events in Tehran. Histories of nation-states and sovereignty ignore the procedural work of laws and contracts concerning natural resources in constructing the newly emergent post-colonial states. Many studies exist of how petroleum laws and contracts impacted Iran’s oil industry, for example, but not in the other direction to think about the transformative work of oil in law. International legal studies refer to the Anglo-Iranian oil dispute in discussing the need for an expanded scope of laws to deal with economic development contracts because after World War II, international law was unfit to deal with the emergence of newly sovereign post-colonial states. These new states were the sole recipients of this type of economic development contract, known as a concession in the colonial period. The eventual legitimization of “raw material sovereignty ” in the 1960s marked a remarkable transfer of legal power that challenge d the international political and economic order. The origins of international relations between the so-called Global North and South, or the Third World, were constructed, in part, out of the need to maintain these contractual agreements between multinational corporations and new states with natural resources such as oil.

中文翻译：

---

特许合同的技术政治：国际法如何因与英伊石油相遇而发生变化

本文考察了英伊石油在国际法中的变革性工作，有助于在文明/未开化和发达/发展之间形成独特的区别。中东是通过国际法和 20 世纪中叶的新布雷顿森林机构进行政治干预的中心地点，该机构试图将前殖民地的权力重新定义为非殖民化进程中的新国家。历史研究并没有将这种社会-法律关系的基础设施作为一个政治项目来解决。摩萨台时期伊朗的政治历史讨论了石油国有化危机对 1953 年政变和德黑兰国内政治​​事件的影响的法律方面。民族国家和主权的历史忽视了有关自然资源的法律和合同在构建新出现的后殖民国家时的程序性工作。例如，存在许多关于石油法律和合同如何影响伊朗石油工业的研究，但不是从另一个方向考虑石油法律的变革性工作。国际法律研究在讨论扩大法律范围以处理经济发展合同的必要性时参考了英伊石油争端，因为二战后，国际法不适合处理新兴主权后殖民国家的出现。这些新国家是这种类型的经济发展合同的唯一接受者，在殖民时期被称为特许权。1960 年代“原材料主权”的最终合法化标志着法律权力的显着转移，挑战了国际政治和经济秩序。所谓的全球南北或第三世界之间国际关系的起源部分是因为需要维持跨国公司与拥有石油等自然资源的新国家之间的这些合同协议。