Alternate History challenge. Have the CIA overthrow the Saudi Royal family and seize control.

in this scenario during the gulf coast war the United States instead of withdrawing troops from Saddam Hussein's Iraq we send them to Saudi Arabia under the theory that they have weapons of mass destruction. H.W. knowing this isn't true has behind the scenes been using his CIA operatives to cause political turmoil in Saudi Arabia. How would a Saudi Royal family in exile look? Who would take them?
 
Why would the US care that a regional ally has WMDs enough to destabilise their country? Unless Saudi Arabia has gone off the rails and is threatening war with Israel and is openly funding terrorism against the United States. You'd basically need Iran to replace Saudi Arabia as the US's major ally in the region to get Saudi Arabia to do something like that.
 

hipper

Banned
in this scenario during the gulf coast war the United States instead of withdrawing troops from Saddam Hussein's Iraq we send them to Saudi Arabia under the theory that they have weapons of mass destruction. H.W. knowing this isn't true has behind the scenes been using his CIA operatives to cause political turmoil in Saudi Arabia. How would a Saudi Royal family in exile look? Who would take them?

The CIA would just choose their Saudi Prince and put him in power the rest would be placed in internal exile in a luxury hotel


https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...ees-159-business-leaders-held-in-riyadh-hotel
 
Have a religious revolution similar to Iran that's endorsed by a much less secular and anti-western prince who becomes king. He then cleans house to cement his rule taking out all male members of the Royal Family.

With a Saudi King that has anti-western interests, in a position to threaten the worlds Oil supply worse than Iraq or Iran ever could, the CIA would get involved. They would probably try to find some sort of descendant that could be given in the thrown in a coup. If that doesn't work out or the President get's involved, you could see attempts at a democratic government being installed.
 
Have a religious revolution similar to Iran that's endorsed by a much less secular and anti-western prince who becomes king. He then cleans house to cement his rule taking out all male members of the Royal Family.

With a Saudi King that has anti-western interests, in a position to threaten the worlds Oil supply worse than Iraq or Iran ever could, the CIA would get involved. They would probably try to find some sort of descendant that could be given in the thrown in a coup. If that doesn't work out or the President get's involved, you could see attempts at a democratic government being installed.
Something like 1979. succes of islamists involved in Grand Mosque seizure (OTL cca 250 dead) leading to popular revolt and Islamic republic of Arabia, which nationalizes Saudi properties and oil companies. Nothing less than that would turn USA against Arabia.
 
Something like 1979. succes of islamists involved in Grand Mosque seizure (OTL cca 250 dead) leading to popular revolt and Islamic republic of Arabia, which nationalizes Saudi properties and oil companies. Nothing less than that would turn USA against Arabia.

Saudi Arabia had already taken 100% ownership of all oil-related assets that were previously owned by ARAMCO by 1979. There wouldn't be anything to nationalize because they'd already incrementally done that from 1974 to 1980.
 
Saudi Arabia had already taken 100% ownership of all oil-related assets that were previously owned by ARAMCO by 1979. There wouldn't be anything to nationalize because they'd already incrementally done that from 1974 to 1980.

That would be around that time.
Until 1973 the government did not receive a share of the oil drilled within its boundaries. In 1973 the Saudi government gained a 25% share of the interest from Aramco.[10] In 1980 the Saudi government purchased nearly 100% of the Aramco oil business giving Saudi officials complete control over prices and production. In 1988 the oil company was renamed Saudi Aramco.
Link at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_in_Saudi_Arabia#Aramco

What I`m talking about is reality, not legal fiction. In a country that has a family surname in its title, with total rule of one man over everyone and everything, that"national" company is run more like a private bussiness. But that is just a tip of ice berg, a royal benefits and other companies, as well a "hidden budget" exist, about what canbe read in articles like the one in New York Times here
The royal family’s fortune derives from the reserves of petroleum discovered during the reign of Salman’s father, King Abdulaziz ibn Saud, more than 75 years ago. The sale of oil provides billions of dollars in annual allowances, public-sector sinecures and perks for royals, the wealthiest of whom own French chateaus and Saudi palaces, stash money in Swiss bank accounts, wear couture dresses under their abayas and frolic on some of the world’s biggest yachts out of sight of commoners...
Joseph A. Kechichian, who has studied the family for three decades and wrote a book, “Succession in Saudi Arabia.” He estimates that there are now 12,000 to 15,000 princes and about as many princesses. Princess Basmah bint Saud, a daughter of King Saud, five years ago put the number of royals at 15,000.

But the Saudi ministry spokesman, Mr. Qusayer, said there were no more than 5,000 members of the House of Saud. The difference may stem in part from whether or how one counts distant relatives and families who ruled back before the time of King Abdulaziz, the current king’s father.
The stipends then ranged from up to $270,000 a month for a son of the founding king to $8,000 a month for his great-great-grandchildren, the official reported. Bonuses of $1 million to $3 million were given to some royals as wedding gifts for palace construction. The official estimated in a memorandum, released with other documents by WikiLeaks five years ago, that the allowances, which included payments to other prominent families around the kingdom, accounted for roughly $2 billion of the government’s total $40 billion budget, or 5 percent of all public spending.


Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/27/world/middleeast/saudi-royal-family-money.html
 
That would be around that time.
Link at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_in_Saudi_Arabia#Aramco

What I`m talking about is reality, not legal fiction. In a country that has a family surname in its title, with total rule of one man over everyone and everything, that"national" company is run more like a private bussiness. But that is just a tip of ice berg, a royal benefits and other companies, as well a "hidden budget" exist, about what canbe read in articles like the one in New York Times here



Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/27/world/middleeast/saudi-royal-family-money.html

Which means all nationalizing oil would do is change who owns it, Saudi oil was already not Western property by the time of the Grand Mosque seizure anyway so there'd be no meaningful change from an outside perspective.
 
Which means all nationalizing oil would do is change who owns it, Saudi oil was already not Western property by the time of the Grand Mosque seizure anyway so there'd be no meaningful change from an outside perspective.

But it would change who runs a county. If religious fanatics who are also social populist seize power, reduce production (because many engineers would leave country) and raise praces, that would get noticed by US and everyone else. The problem is not their islamism, it`s their populism, antisemitism and antiwesternism.
 
But it would change who runs a county. If religious fanatics who are also social populist seize power, reduce production (because many engineers would leave country) and raise praces, that would get noticed by US and everyone else. The problem is not their islamism, it`s their populism, antisemitism and antiwesternism.

And the same US that bungled Eagle Claw & was at it's lowest state of military readiness at any point ever during the Cold War period along with a population for whom the war wounds of Vietnam are still very fresh meaning no appetite for a prolonged operation will do that how exactly?

Plus the OP is glossing over a critical fact:

The Iranian Revolution happened because the military rank & file revolted after being ordered to attack their fellow Iranians. This was in part because they were NOT a force trained or meant to maintain domestic stability or enforce order at gunpoint.

There are specific branches of the Saudi military, even then, whose entire purpose is to do exactly that.

On top of that much of the religious establishment was firmly on the side of the monarchy in 1979.

To get the Islamic Revolution proposed to happen you'd need to change those two factors & that would need to happen decades earlier.
 
Top