Saudi oil owned by Private company till today

Saudi Aramco was founded in 1933 by what became Chevron. Oil discovered in Saudi Arabia in 1938. After World War 2 the Saudi government took over half of it's shares. After the Yom Kippur War it was completely nationalized. But What if before the Third Saudi State was established in 1902 a Private Company forged an alliance with independent rulers of Eastern Arabia to protect them in exchange for ownership of all oil discovered in their territories and this alliance repells all invasions

 
Saudi Aramco was founded in 1933 by what became Chevron. Oil discovered in Saudi Arabia in 1938. After World War 2 the Saudi government took over half of it's shares. After the Yom Kippur War it was completely nationalized. But What if before the Third Saudi State was established in 1902 a Private Company forged an alliance with independent rulers of Eastern Arabia to protect them in exchange for ownership of all oil discovered in their territories and this alliance repells all invasions

It would be nationalised by whatever faction retained control of the area as the Saudi's eventually did. Too much money for any state / warlord not to want to take control.
 
After the Yom Kippur War it was completely nationalized. But What if before the Third Saudi State was established in 1902 a Private Company forged an alliance with independent rulers of Eastern Arabia to protect them in exchange for ownership of all oil discovered in their territories and this alliance repells all invasions
They wouldn't forge an alliance with a foreign company in that case, they would just ask to be a protectorate, probably to the Brits.
But I doubt there would be much point in accepting to be their protector for GB since the land doesn't have anything interesting before the discovery of oil and searching for more is not really important since they get it from Iran.
Though I doubt there would be much point in researching oil in Arabia at the time at all.
 
Last edited:
It would be nationalised by whatever faction retained control of the area as the Saudi's eventually did. Too much money for any state / warlord not to want to take control.
Did you even read the OP? The basis of the company is to prevent any other faction from taking control.
 
Last edited:
A far better world for everyone besides certain sunni fundamentalists. Better the money goes to blackrock/vanguard than to funding extremist madrassas.
 
A far better world for everyone besides certain sunni fundamentalists. Better the money goes to blackrock/vanguard than to funding extremist madrassas.
Actually it was (is?) worse than that. Saudis were financing Al Qaeda with proceeds from oil sales to the USA. The USA was fighting Al Qaeda with US troops paid for by US tax payers. What country in its right mind finances both sides of a war?

It would be nationalised by whatever faction retained control of the area as the Saudi's eventually did. Too much money for any state / warlord not to want to take control.
And too much money for grifters and sycophants of the government not to steal.
 
Did you even read the OP? The basis of the company is to prevent any other faction from taking control.
We're not in the ASB forum - how do you propose this is achieved? Are you suggesting an "East India Company" look alike in the 20th century controlling a quarter of the world's oil reserves in 1980 backed by a few Sheikhs in the desert? Why wouldn't someone just roll in and annex them? Or are their "...words backed by nuclear weapons..." (for the Civ series fans out there o_O )?
 
Actually it was (is?) worse than that. Saudis were financing Al Qaeda with proceeds from oil sales to the USA. The USA was fighting Al Qaeda with US troops paid for by US tax payers. What country in its right mind finances both sides of a war?


And too much money for grifters and sycophants of the government not to steal.
Given that the war on terror was in many ways the fighting of an internal dispute within the saudis using US troops well... the US, apparently
 
Top