IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/jglhis/v17y2022i1p69-88_4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Strategies of Decolonization: Economic Sovereignty and National Security in Libyan–US Relations, 1949–1971

Author

Listed:
  • Dietrich, Christopher R. W.

Abstract

This article examines Libyan–US relations through the historical lenses of decolonization, international law, the Cold War, and the international political economy. The Libyan government exercised its newfound sovereignty in the postwar era through the negotiation of ‘base rights’ for the US government and ‘oil rights’ for corporations owned by US nationals. They did so in conjunction with other petrostates and through international organizations such as the United Nations, the Arab League, and the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries. Libyan leaders’ strategy of using sovereignty to promote corporate competition relied on connections with similarly situated nations, and it was through global circuits of knowledge that they pressed the outer limits of economic sovereignty. At the same time, the US government consistently accommodated Libyan policies through Cold War arguments that linked the alliance with Libya to US national security. Those deep foundations of sovereignty and security created the conditions for the transformation of the global oil industry after Libya’s 1969 revolution.

Suggested Citation

  • Dietrich, Christopher R. W., 2022. "Strategies of Decolonization: Economic Sovereignty and National Security in Libyan–US Relations, 1949–1971," Journal of Global History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 17(1), pages 69-88, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:jglhis:v:17:y:2022:i:1:p:69-88_4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1740022821000140/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:jglhis:v:17:y:2022:i:1:p:69-88_4. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/jgh .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.