WI: American Invasion of the Middle East in response to 1973 Oil Crisis

I was reading about the 1973 Oil Crisis and i caught this little nugget in Wikipedia

"America's Cold War policies suffered a major blow from the embargo. They had focused on China and the Soviet Union, but the latent challenge to US hegemony coming from the third world became evident.

In 2004, declassified documents revealed that the U.S. was so distraught by the rise in oil prices and being challenged by under-developed countries that they briefly considered military action to forcibly seize Middle Eastern oilfields in late 1973. Although no explicit plan was mentioned, a conversation between U.S. Secretary of Defense James Schlesinger and British Ambassador to the United States Lord Cromer revealed Schlesinger had told him that "it was no longer obvious to him that the U.S. could not use force."British Prime Minister Edward Heath was so worried by this prospect that he ordered a British intelligence estimate of U.S. intentions, which concluded America "might consider it could not tolerate a situation in which the U.S. and its allies were at the mercy of a small group of unreasonable countries," and that they would prefer a rapid operation to seize oilfields in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, and possibly Abu Dhabi in military action was decided upon. Although the Soviet response to such an act would likely not involve force, intelligence warned "the American occupation would need to last 10 years as the West developed alternative energy sources, and would result in the ‘total alienation’ of the Arabs and much of the rest of the Third World."

Further:
http://nationalinterest.org/feature/the-time-america-almost-invaded-opec-15726

What would have happened if the United States invaded some or all of these places in order to alleviate it's economic oil Crisis? Obviously it did not occur OTL, but i could imagine that if those states persisted in their embargo the United States could have been forced to react. Perhaps the Soviet Union would have provided military aid to Saudi Arabia and might it a bloody affair.

It's possible that the Middle Eastern states would relent on the Embargo in the face of an American ultimatum and thread of military force. It may even force them into a negotiated settlement. Perhaps they would do a withdrawal in the face of American invasion ala Saddam Hussein in the 1990 Gulf War and burn their oil wells.

I'm not sure what sort of resources the Soviet Union had in the middle east at the time, but they had a lot of influence with those countries arrayed against Israel.

the after affects of such an invasion on relations between the U.S. and third world powers would probably be drastic.
 
It would probably be a huge PR disaster for the US in not only the eyes of its European allies but also that of almost every other ally the US has and a boon for the USSR. In fact it might help destabilize the Middle East even more it has ITTL, and could encourage terrorism upon the US just as the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan did IOTL. Not a good recipe for a country that is just getting out of Vietnam and had its share of anti-war protestors; imagine the reactions from the public (that are leftwing) to this kind of invasion.
 
Perhaps they would do a withdrawal in the face of American invasion ala Saddam Hussein in the 1990 Gulf War and burn their oil wells.

I'm not sure what sort of resources the Soviet Union had in the middle east at the time, but they had a lot of influence with those countries arrayed against Israel.

Advisers in Syria, Iraq and Egypt, but after Yom Kippur, there wasn't much to help. The Soviet Mediterranean Squadron was far outclassed by the Sixth Fleet. They had no air cover from their Arab clients, mostly all destroyed by Israel, as was their naval forces. They did have an airborne division that could be flown in.

The Arab Gulf states had laughable armed forces in the '70s. There was nothing there that could have stopped even the malaise era USMC from landing and taking the eastern half of the country, plus Kuwait and Abu Dhabi.

Then, as now, most of the workers were not Saudis, anyway. Why would Aramco blow wells? Saudis were not yet majority shareholders

Al-Bakr was still trying to keep the lid on Iraq after the Coup, so nothing to worry about there, given the Shah. He kept on selling Oil, and didn't mind the higher prices.
 
Wouldn't it make sense to invade somewhere for oil a little closer to the States like Venezuela which has a lot. While it was a member of OPEC they were hardly likely to send what ever naval vessels they have half way around the globe to defend it. The USA still had Panama in the 70's to work out of and Colombia the nearest neighbour has it's own problems with FARK and the growing drug trade.
 

Cook

Banned
Wouldn't it make sense to invade somewhere for oil a little closer to the States like Venezuela which has a lot.

Venezuela didn't take part in the 1973 oil embargo, only the Arab members of OPEC refused to sell oil to countries that provided support to Israel. It would hardly make sense to invade a country that was already pumping oil at the maximum rate they possibly could and ignore the countries that had cut production.

...the growing drug trade.

1973 was a full decade before the first cocaine from Columbia found its way to Florida via Venezuela.
 

Delta Force

Banned
The petroleum and gas fields of Kuwait, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates could likely be captured quickly due to their proximity to the Persian Gulf and the small size, population, and military strength of those countries (many relying on foreign experts). However, seizing the petroleum and gas fields of Iraq and Saudi Arabia would be more complicated due to their stronger militaries and major fields being located more inland. Umm Qasr would have to be captured to allow for any export of Iraqi production, but most of Iraq's petroleum and gas fields and production are actually in the North. Ghawar is the major petroleum field in Saudi Arabia (and largest in the world), but it stretches over hundreds of kilometers and also has centralized infrastructure to get its production out.

Assuming the gambit works, and it might, the United States government would then be left in the tenuous position of having to get everything working and to market, because the energy companies might not be willing to work with the United States government because it would be a severe offense to the governments if/when the occupation ends and for any other potential business partners. Relations with the Arab world will be severely strained as well, and quite likely with most of the rest of the developing world, which did have some sympathy with the OPEC position. Then there is the risk of other petroleum producers joining in on the embargo, the Israeli conflict, etc.

An invasion and occupation of the Middle East's petroleum and gas fields would definitely not be a first course of action.
 
If America really wanted a foothold in the Middle East (and oil rich Africa) they should have supported Britain the region. In the 1950s Britain directly or indirectly controlled Nigeria, Kuwait, Oman, Bahrain and much of the oil region. Once the US kicked Britain at Suez, London pulled out of the region.

mideast.jpg
 

Cook

Banned
The most glaringly obvious obstacle to this plan is that Saudi Arabia’s declared strategy in the event of invasion by a foreign power was to destroy the oil fields. The United States would be substitution a temporary shortfall in imports from Saudi Arabia for a permanent shortfall in imports from Saudi Arabia. The Americans would also be marching in an occupying several foreign nations, and could look forward to the inevitable insurgency to follow, having only just withdrawn from Vietnam that year.
 
Wasn't this one of the cenarios that kicked of WWIII?

Wasn't the US pulling out of Vietnam at this time? Was it even capable of mounting such an operation?
 

Delta Force

Banned
If America really wanted a foothold in the Middle East (and oil rich Africa) they should have supported Britain the region. In the 1950s Britain directly or indirectly controlled Nigeria, Kuwait, Oman, Bahrain and much of the oil region. Once the US kicked Britain at Suez, London pulled out of the region.

mideast.jpg

Some of the British protectorates in the Middle East wanted to continue their relationship with the United Kingdom and even offered to pay for the costs of stationing military forces in the region, but the British government decided to withdraw anyways in the early 1970s.
 
Some of the British protectorates in the Middle East wanted to continue their relationship with the United Kingdom and even offered to pay for the costs of stationing military forces in the region
IIRC, Singapore did the same. Britain lost its nerve in those days and scurried home. It's no wonder Galtieri made his move in '82.
 
The most glaringly obvious obstacle to this plan is that Saudi Arabia’s declared strategy in the event of invasion by a foreign power was to destroy the oil fields. The United States would be substitution a temporary shortfall in imports from Saudi Arabia for a permanent shortfall in imports from Saudi Arabia. The Americans would also be marching in an occupying several foreign nations, and could look forward to the inevitable insurgency to follow, having only just withdrawn from Vietnam that year.
True that. If the USA invades, the Arabs will give them one last middle finger by destroying the very thing they wanted to invade them for.
 
True that. If the USA invades, the Arabs will give them one last middle finger by destroying the very thing they wanted to invade them for.
Which then drives up the price and profits of US oil. If this is the 1970s, it further drives domestic oil exploration and support for resource independence.

I imagine there are plenty of oil barons in the USA that wish the Arabs would destroy their oil production today.
 
I think such a scenario would become more likely had Vietnam ended earlier or never happened at all.

The public probably isn't likely to support such an operation after Vietnam
 
Afaik, there's no way 1970's US could support itself, oil-wise...

from all sources, the US imported around 5800 thousand barrels a day, not all was from OPEC, and not all OPEC did the embargo.

Around 3000 thousand barrels a day were from non-OPEC sources. Saudi was 485 thousand a day, vs 1285 from Canada. Nigeria equal to Saudi, and Venezuela was 1134

OPEC was around 17% of oil consumption for the US.

And with the embargo, the US did keep going, after all.
 
True that. If the USA invades, the Arabs will give them one last middle finger by destroying the very thing they wanted to invade them for.

It's the only thing they had to sell.
They got addicted to Petro-Dollars. They were old enough to recal the days before WWII when they were poor.

And there were few Saudis or Kuwaitis working those fields to do that destruction.
 
Top