WI: Arab states refuse to halt 1973 oil embargo

In this scenario, the Arab states refuse to halt the 1973 oil embargo. They state the embargo will remain in place until the West halts all support for Israel, and withdraws recognition for Israel.

What will happen? Would this be enough to deter the West from supporting Israel any longer, or will more pressure be needed?
 

Khanzeer

Banned
In this scenario, the Arab states refuse to halt the 1973 oil embargo. They state the embargo will remain in place until the West halts all support for Israel, and withdraws recognition for Israel.

What will happen? Would this be enough to deter the West from supporting Israel any longer, or will more pressure be needed?
arent the arab oil states economy heavily depedent on exports ?
and also dependent on western expertise as well ?
I do not see iran being a part of this embargo , so we can see local unrest developing in these countries by local home grown opposition and then a NATO forced backed by iran and turkey essentially taking over the capitols of all the gulf monarchies and restore status quo
I do not forsee any opposition from the arab armed forces.
USSR would not start ww3 to oppose them and neither do have the teeth to do much in the middle east anyway
iraq, syria , libya , pakistan may be really upset burn down western embassies and do some saber rattling at the UN but if an armada of western warships enter the gulf and land 10,000 marines from all major western nations to seize the oil producing regions to install a friendly "democratic" govt i see no power on earth able to stop them.This is safely far away from mecca too so muslim religious feelings would not be hurt.BTW syria and iraq can be easily persuaded to join western camp, former by helping them economically and latter by promising kuwait.
 
Last edited:
I'm sure the Arab states could just sell more to the Soviets or something like that.
Two problems with that:
1. The Arabs were net food importers and the West can survive a lot better without oil, than the Arabs can without food. Especially since the West does have other sources of oil. Venezuela and the like will be doing rather well in TTL until the Arabs cool down.
2. The Soviets were net oil exporters not importers. A continuing embargo would be great for them as they'll be making bank from the higher oil prices, but they'd hardly buy anything they already produce a surplus of. They also can't help the Arabs with the food situation as they had preciously little to spare.

Other things that'll happen:
- Western Counterespionage Departments will be putting environmentalist organisations under a microscope to get proof of links between the USSR and anti-nuclear-power groups. Newspapers are leaned on to stop parroting environmentalist doom-mongering and actually report on how the USSR is using them to prevent NATO from achieving energy independence. Same for anti-North-Sea-Oil-drilling environmentalists. Over the next year North Sea Oil production expands as fast as new rigs can be built and personnel be trained. Nuclear power takes off.

- Investments in research to develop fracking starts early and is heavily subsidized

- Once Nuclear power starts being expanded, feasibility of electricity powered cars is explored much earlier and with more vigor. For the interim expect more electricity powered trains and inner city public transportation. Not just subways, also expect to see widespread use of Trolleybuses. The latter also making an appearance in local transport in smaller towns.
 
CIA: Time for some regime change.


The problem is, if the CIA overturns gulf monarchies the result might be secular regimes on better terms with the USSR such as those in Egypt, Algeria, Syria, Iraq and Libya.
Btw a long oil embargo could prove risky to gulf monarchies even if the CIA left them alone. Without money to essentially bribe many citizens into keeping quiet there could be fatal resistance, which had already toppled monarchies in Egypt, Iraq and Libya.
 
The economies of the Arab monarchies dry up and there is wide spread unrest when the cash stops flowing in. Texas is very happy as wells are reopened that were uneconomical at the lower prices when mid-east crude was plentiful. Nigerian, Mexican, Venezuelan and other smaller producers increase production. Sources such as the Canadian tar sands are exploited earlier. Iran makes out like a bandit with the Shah laughing all the way to the bank.
 
Had the Arabs so foolish to continue the Oil Boycott (and cutting in own flesh)

They could have nasty surprise that Nixon execute his foolish idea:
A military intervention in Saudi Arabia

What follow that will be very interesting Spectacle to watch...
popcorn_stephen_colbert.gif
 
I'm sure the Arab states could just sell more to the Soviets or something like that.

The Soviets were oil exporters.

As for selling the oil only to countries that weren't friendly to Israel, the problem is obvious:

"Despite what many noneconomists believe, the 1973–1974 price increase was not caused by the oil “embargo” (refusal to sell) that the Arab members of OPEC directed at the United States and the Netherlands. Instead, OPEC reduced its production of crude oil, raising world market prices sharply. The embargo against the United States and the Netherlands had no effect whatsoever: people in both nations were able to obtain oil at the same prices as people in all other nations. This failure of the embargo was predictable, in that oil is a “fungible” commodity that can be resold among buyers. An embargo by sellers is an attempt to raise prices for some buyers but not others. Only one price can prevail in the world market, however, because differences in prices will lead to arbitrage: that is, a higher price in a given market will induce other buyers to resell oil into the high-price market, thus equalizing prices worldwide." https://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/OPEC.html
 
1. The Arabs were net food importers and the West can survive a lot better without oil, than the Arabs can without food. Especially since the West does have other sources of oil. Venezuela and the like will be doing rather well in TTL until the Arabs cool down
I remember reading in Time/Newsweek and the like at the time about using food against the Arabs, and the main reason why it wouldn't work: there just aren't that many Arabs, and if we cut them off, they could rather easily buy enough food elsewhere. In the end, the embargo turned out to be not so great for the Gulf states... it spurred on a drive in the US for energy/vehicle efficiency and looking for alternate sources of oil...
 
I'm sure the Arab states could just sell more to the Soviets or something like that.
The Soviets were selling on World Market, not buying Oil
there just aren't that many Arabs, and if we cut them off, they could rather easily buy enough food elsewhere.

From the USSR?
They were buying from the USA
They could have nasty surprise that Nixon execute his foolish idea:
A military intervention in Saudi Arabia

The US Military was at its Nadir in 1974.

And that would still be more than enough to take care of the Saudi Forces in the eastern Oil Rich area
 
The problem is, if the CIA overturns gulf monarchies the result might be secular regimes on better terms with the USSR such as those in Egypt, Algeria, Syria, Iraq and Libya.
Thing about Monarchies, there's almost always another Prince who would rather be King
 
From the USSR?
They were buying from the USA
at the time; but if we had tried some kind of 'food embargo', they could have found other sources, due to the small number of people in those particular nations. Unlike oil, there was enough food in the international market that they could have found more easily enough. And like oil, they could have bought food from the US from third parties. The main point was that food wasn't a leveraging chip against them...
 
And like oil, they could have bought food from the US from third parties. The main point was that food wasn't a leveraging chip against them...
And your main point is wrong. Like oil food is a commodity that can be bought and resold through third parties. And just like the Oil Embargo didn't cut of the West from oil, but did make it more expensive the same thing would happen with food.
Food prices increasing by say 10% isn't as bad as being cut off from it. However a society who's members were used to it's government generously throwing oil money at them as bribes for not getting unruly, now suddenly also experiences rising food prices on top of having less disposable income, then calling that "not a leveraging chip" is significantly understating things.
 
Food prices increasing by say 10% isn't as bad as being cut off from it. However a society who's members were used to it's government generously throwing oil money at them as bribes for not getting unruly, now suddenly also experiences rising food prices on top of having less disposable income, then calling that "not a leveraging chip" is significantly understating things.
large_Gc5kq778BLLJGB0I2JUeOWB6lHUO1EYwtBKJz2N_AyU.PNG


A 10% increase in food costs isn't too bad of a deal when only 10% of your wages go for food.

Now look in the poorer countries, even the Oil Rich ones.

When your 40% of wages goes to 44 percent for food purchases, that's really noticeable
 

kernals12

Banned
They can only last so long, they need oil money to survive. Non-Arab oil states will increase their output to compensate. The Israelis will laugh as the Arab states bankrupt themselves due to their seething anti-semitism.
 
Last edited:

kernals12

Banned
Two problems with that:
1. The Arabs were net food importers and the West can survive a lot better without oil, than the Arabs can without food. Especially since the West does have other sources of oil. Venezuela and the like will be doing rather well in TTL until the Arabs cool down.
2. The Soviets were net oil exporters not importers. A continuing embargo would be great for them as they'll be making bank from the higher oil prices, but they'd hardly buy anything they already produce a surplus of. They also can't help the Arabs with the food situation as they had preciously little to spare.

Other things that'll happen:
- Western Counterespionage Departments will be putting environmentalist organisations under a microscope to get proof of links between the USSR and anti-nuclear-power groups. Newspapers are leaned on to stop parroting environmentalist doom-mongering and actually report on how the USSR is using them to prevent NATO from achieving energy independence. Same for anti-North-Sea-Oil-drilling environmentalists. Over the next year North Sea Oil production expands as fast as new rigs can be built and personnel be trained. Nuclear power takes off.

- Investments in research to develop fracking starts early and is heavily subsidized

- Once Nuclear power starts being expanded, feasibility of electricity powered cars is explored much earlier and with more vigor. For the interim expect more electricity powered trains and inner city public transportation. Not just subways, also expect to see widespread use of Trolleybuses. The latter also making an appearance in local transport in smaller towns.
The Lithium Ion battery would not arrive until 1991, there's no way you can speed up its development by that much.
 

kernals12

Banned
The economies of the Arab monarchies dry up and there is wide spread unrest when the cash stops flowing in. Texas is very happy as wells are reopened that were uneconomical at the lower prices when mid-east crude was plentiful. Nigerian, Mexican, Venezuelan and other smaller producers increase production. Sources such as the Canadian tar sands are exploited earlier. Iran makes out like a bandit with the Shah laughing all the way to the bank.
This.

Also, Detroit switches all of its cars to Front Wheel Drive, homeowners in the Northeastern US get rid of their oil fired furnaces, and Japan and Italy shut off all of their fuel oil power stations.
 
Top