History Podcasts

What was the “concession territory” the IPC lost to Qasim's 1961 Public Law 80?

What was the “concession territory” the IPC lost to Qasim's 1961 Public Law 80?


We are searching data for your request:

Forums and discussions:
Manuals and reference books:
Data from registers:
Wait the end of the search in all databases.
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.

In 1961, the Iraq Petroleum Company, larger owned by foreign corporations, had a monopoly over Iraq's oil fields. Then in 1961, Qasim, Iraq's prime minister, instituted Public Law (PL) 80 to expropriate 99.5% of the IPC's concession area and prevent them from exploring new oil fields.

My simple problem is that I have no idea what this so-called "concession area" is. What is a "concession area"? What did the IPC lose here? What did it still have?


A "concession" in the oil industry is similar to a "claim" in mining -- it's a right, granted by a government, to explore for oil and extract it when found. The government gets a portion of the oil revenue based on the terms of the contract.

The way that oil extraction works, the license covers a specific area of land, ususlly government owned. That's what a "concession territory" is.

As the Wikipedia article about the event you refer to explains, the oil consortium called the Turkish Petroleum Company, later called the Iraq (not International) Petroleum Company, snapped up most of the concession territory in Iraq.

If a government feels that the terms are unfavorable, it can simply revoke the concession, and that's exactly what Iraq did.

IPC lost the right to develop oil under almost all of the territory that Iraq had previously granted it.

Iraq ran the risk of the companies convincing their own governments to go to war with it.

But this was the height of the Cold War, the American partners of IPC had already withdrawn to join ARAMCO, and Qasim was pivoting Iraq's allegiance towards the Soviet Union.


Watch the video: Vaughn Meaders last impersonation (July 2022).


Comments:

  1. Nechtan

    but in general it's funny.

  2. Aiken

    I heard this story about 7 years ago.

  3. Krany

    It agrees, the information is very good

  4. Roel

    In it something is. Thank you for the explanation, I also find that more easily better ...

  5. Shaktijind

    I'm sorry I can't help you. I hope you find the right solution. Do not despair.



Write a message