The
1973 oil crisis began in October 1973 when the members of the
Organization of Arab Petroleum Exporting Countries (OAPEC, consisting of the
Arab members of the
OPEC plus
Egypt,
Syria and
Tunisia) proclaimed an oil
embargo. By the end of the embargo in March 1974,
[1] the price of oil had risen from $3 per
barrel to nearly $12. The oil crisis, or "shock", had many short-term and long-term effects on global politics and the global economy.
[2] It was later called the
first oil shock, with the
1979 oil crisis being the "second oil shock."
High-level summary
OAPEC started the embargo in response to the
United States involvement in the 1973
Yom Kippur War. Six days after Egypt and Syria launched a surprise military campaign against
Israel to regain territories lost in the June 1967
Six Day War, the United States supplied Israel with arms. In response to this, OAPEC announced an oil embargo against
Canada,
Japan, the
Netherlands, the
United Kingdom and the United States.
[3]
The crisis had a major impact on international relations and a strong rift was created within
NATO.
It was thought the oil embargo would increase oil prices in the long
term, disrupt oil supply, and was the cause of the ensuing
economic recession. Additionally, some European nations and Japan sought to disassociate themselves from
United States foreign policy in the Middle East.
Arab oil producers had also linked any possible end of the embargo with
successful US efforts to create peace between the belligerents, which
complicated the situation. To address this, the
Nixon Administration
began multilateral negotiations with Arab oil producers to end the
embargo. They arranged for Egypt, Syria and Israel to pull back from the
Sinai and the
Golan Heights. By January 18, 1974 Secretary of State
Henry Kissinger
had negotiated an Israeli troop withdrawal from parts of the Sinai
peninsula. The promise of a negotiated settlement between Israel and
Syria was enough to convince Arab oil producers to lift the embargo in
March 1974.
[1]
Independently, the OAPEC members agreed to use their leverage over the world
price-setting mechanism for
oil
to stabilize their real incomes by raising world oil prices after the
recent failure of negotiations with major Western oil companies.
The embargo also occurred at a time of global increase in petroleum
consumption by the industrialized countries targeted by OAPEC, and
particularly coincided with a sharp increase in oil imports by the
world's largest oil consumer-the United States. In the aftermath of the
crisis, the targeted countries initiated a wide variety of new, and
mostly permanent policies to contain their future dependency.
The 1973 "oil price shock", along with the
1973–1974 stock market crash, have been regarded as the first event since the
Great Depression to have a persistent economic effect.
[4]
The success of the embargo demonstrated the financial clout and international power of
Saudi Arabia, the largest oil exporter and a politically and religiously conservative kingdom. In the Arab world, progressive
Arab nationalism was swept aside by an
Islamic revival.
Throughout the Muslim world, in the coming years, the greatly increased
wealth and international prestige of Saudi Arabia would help the
puritanical, conservative "
Wahhabi" interpretation of Islam it favored ("
petro-Islam") "attain a preeminent position of strength in the global expression of Islam."
[5]
Background
USA peak oil production
In 1970, the United States went through its oil
production peak. Some theorize that this is the reason for the first oil shock.
[6] Following this, Nixon named
James Akins
as the U.S. ambassador to Saudi Arabia to audit the U.S. production
capacity. The results, although not provided to the press, were
alarming—no spare capacity was available and production could only
decrease.
USA oil production and imports. As shown the import spike starts from US peak and the so-called "embargo" almost has no effect.
The oil embargo was not effective in limiting supply shortages, according to James Akins.
[7]
However, taking into consideration the following presentation on the
economic consequences of the embargo, it is very clear that the embargo
had short-term and long-term impacts on the US economy.
OPEC
The
Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC), which then comprised 12 countries, including
Iran, seven
Arab countries (
Iraq,
Kuwait,
Libya,
Qatar,
Saudi Arabia, the
United Arab Emirates), plus
Venezuela,
Indonesia,
Nigeria, and
Ecuador, had been formed at a
Baghdad conference on September 14, 1960. OPEC was organized to resist pressure by the "
Seven Sisters" (seven large oil companies, mostly owned by U.S., British, and Dutch nationals) to reduce
oil prices and payments to producing countries.
At first, OPEC had operated as an informal bargaining unit for the sale of oil by resource-rich
third-world
countries. OPEC confined its activities to gaining a larger share of
the profits generated by the Western oil companies and greater control
over the members' levels of production. As a result of this and other
events in the early 1970s, it began to exert its economic and political
strength; the major Western oil conglomerates, as well as the importing
nations, suddenly faced a unified bloc of exporters.
End of the Bretton Woods Accord
On August 15, 1971, the United States unilaterally
pulled out of the
Bretton Woods Accord taking the United States off the
Gold Exchange Standard (whereby the value of the U.S. dollar had been
pegged to the
price of gold and all other currencies were pegged to the U.S. dollar), allowing the dollar to "float".
[8] Shortly thereafter, Britain followed, floating the
pound sterling
and the other industrialized nations followed suit with their
respective currencies. In anticipation of the fluctuation of currencies
as they stabilized against each other, the industrialized nations
increased their reserves (by printing paper money) in amounts far
greater than ever before. The result was a
depreciation
of the value of the U.S. dollar, as well as other industrialized
nations' currencies. Because oil was priced in dollars, this meant that
oil producers real income decreased and in September 1971 OPEC issued a
joint communiqué stating that, from then on, they would price a barrel
of oil against gold.
[9]
This contributed to the "Oil Shock." In the years after 1971, OPEC
was slow to readjust prices to reflect this depreciation. From 1947 to
1967, the price of oil in U.S. dollars had risen by less than two
percent per year. Until the oil shock, the price remained fairly stable
versus other currencies and commodities, but suddenly became extremely
volatile thereafter. OPEC ministers had not developed the institutional
mechanisms to update prices rapidly enough to keep up with changing
market conditions, so their
real incomes
lagged for several years. The substantial price increases of 1973–74
largely caught up their incomes to Bretton Woods levels in terms of
other commodities such as gold.
[10]
Yom Kippur War
On October 6, 1973, Syria and Egypt, with support of other Arab nations, launched a
surprise attack on
Israel on the holiest day of the Jewish calendar.
[11] This renewal of hostilities in the
Arab-Israeli conflict
was the trigger to release the underlying economic pressure on the
price of oil. That the oil price had to move regardless of the war was
stressed by the
Shah of Iran,
whose nation was the world's second-largest exporter of oil and a close
ally of the United States in the Middle East at the time. "Of course
[the world price of oil] is going to rise", the Shah told the
New York Times
in 1973. "Certainly! And how...; You [Western nations] increased the
price of wheat you sell us by 300%, and the same for sugar and
cement...; You buy our
crude oil and sell it back to us, refined as
petrochemicals,
at a hundred times the price you've paid to us...; It's only fair that,
from now on, you should pay more for oil. Let's say ten times more."
[12]
On October 12, 1973, President
Richard Nixon authorized
Operation Nickel Grass,
an overt strategic airlift to deliver weapons and supplies to Israel,
after the Soviet Union began sending arms to Syria and Egypt.
Arab oil embargo in response to war
In response to the U.S. aid to Israel, on October 16, 1973, OPEC
announced a decision to raise the posted price of oil by 70%, to $5.11 a
barrel.
[13]
The following day, oil ministers agreed to the embargo, a cut in
production by five percent from September's output, and to continue to
cut production over time in five percent increments until their economic
and political objectives were met.
[14] October 19, U.S. President
Richard Nixon requested Congress to appropriate $2.2 billion in emergency aid to Israel, including $1.5 billion in outright grants.
George Lenczowski
notes, "Military supplies did not exhaust Nixon's eagerness to prevent
Israel's collapse...This [$2.2 billion] decision triggered a collective
OPEC response".
[15] Libya immediately announced it would embargo all oil shipments to the United States.
[16] Saudi Arabia and the other Arab oil-producing states quickly followed suit, joining the embargo on October 20, 1973.
[17] At their meeting in Kuwait the OPEC oil-producing countries proclaimed the oil
boycott
that provided for curbs on their oil exports to various consumer
countries and a total embargo on oil deliveries to the United States as a
"principal hostile country".
[18] The embargo was thus variously extended to Western Europe and Japan.
Price increases were also imposed. Since short-term oil
demand is
inelastic,
demand falls little when the price is raised. Thus, oil prices had to
be raised dramatically to reduce demand to the new, lower level of
supply. Anticipating this, the market price for oil immediately rose
substantially, from $3 per barrel to $12 per barrel.
[19] The world financial system, which was already under pressure from the breakdown of the
Bretton Woods agreement,
was set on a path of recessions and high inflation that persisted until
the early 1980s, with oil prices continuing to rise until 1986.
The price of oil during the embargo. The graph is based on the
nominal, not real,
price of oil, and so overstates prices at the end. However, the effects
of the Arab Oil Embargo are clear—it effectively doubled the real price
of crude oil at the refinery level, and caused massive shortages in the
U.S.
Over the long term, the oil embargo changed the nature of policy in
the West towards increased exploration, energy conservation, and more
restrictive monetary policy to better fight inflation.
[citation needed]
Chronology
- January 1973—The 1973–1974 stock market crash begins, as a result of inflation pressure, the Nixon Shock and the collapsing monetary system.
- August 23, 1973—In preparation for the Yom Kippur War, Saudi King Faisal and Egyptian president Anwar Sadat meet in Riyadh and secretly negotiate an accord whereby the Arabs will use the "oil weapon" as part of the upcoming military conflict.[20]
- October 6 – Egypt and Syria attack Israeli occupied lands in Sinai and Golan Heights on Yom Kippur, starting the Yom Kippur War.
- night of October 8 - Israel goes on full nuclear alert. Sec.
Kissinger is notified a few hours later the morning of October 9. United
States begins to resupply Israel.
- October 8–10—OPEC negotiations with major oil companies to revise the 1971 Tehran price agreement fail.
- October 12— The United States initiates Operation Nickel Grass,
an overt strategic airlift operation to provide replacement weapons and
supplies to Israel during the Yom Kippur War. This followed similar Soviet moves to supply the Arab side.
- October 16 – Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, Abu Dhabi, Kuwait, and Qatar unilaterally raise posted prices by 17% to $3.65 per barrel and announce production cuts.[21]
- October 17—OAPEC oil ministers agree to use oil as a weapon to
influence the West's support of Israel in the Yom Kippur war. They
recommend an embargo against non-complying states and mandate a cut in
exports.
- October 19—U.S. President Richard Nixon requests Congress to appropriate $2.2 billion in emergency aid to Israel, which triggered a collective Arab response.[15] Libya immediately proclaims an embargo on oil exports to the United States;[16] Saudi Arabia and other Arab oil producing states follow suit the next day.[16]
- October 26—The Yom Kippur War ends.
- November 5—Arab producers announce a 25% output cut. A further 5% cut is threatened.
- November 23—The Arab embargo is extended to Portugal, Rhodesia, and South Africa.
- November 27—U.S. President Richard Nixon signs the Emergency Petroleum Allocation Act authorizing price, production, allocation and marketing controls.
- December 9—Arab oil ministers agree to another five percent cut for non-friendly countries for January 1974.
- December 25—Arab oil ministers cancel the five percent output cut for January. Saudi oil minister Ahmed Zaki Yamani promises a ten percent OPEC production rise.
- January 7–9, 1974—OPEC decides to freeze prices until April 1.
- January 18—Israel signs a withdrawal agreement to pull back to the east side of the Suez Canal.
- February 11 – United States Secretary of State Henry Kissinger unveils the Project Independence plan to make U.S. energy independent.
- February 12–14—Progress in Arab-Israeli disengagement brings discussion of oil strategy among the heads of state of Algeria, Egypt, Syria and Saudi Arabia.
- March 5—Israel withdraws the last of its troops from the west side of the Suez Canal.
- March 17—Arab oil ministers, with the exception of Libya, announce the end of the embargo against the United States.
- May 31—Diplomacy by Henry Kissinger produces a disengagement agreement on the Syrian front.
- December 1974—The 1973–1974 stock market crash ends.
Immediate economic effects
A man at a service station reads about the gasoline rationing system in
an afternoon newspaper; a sign in the background states that no gasoline
is available. 1974
The effects of the embargo were immediate. OPEC forced the oil
companies to increase payments drastically. The price of oil quadrupled
by 1974 to nearly US$12 per
barrel (75 US$/m
3).
[2]
This increase in the price of oil had a dramatic effect on oil
exporting nations, for the countries of the Middle East who had long
been dominated by the industrial powers were seen to have acquired
control of a vital commodity. The traditional flow of capital reversed
as the oil-exporting nations accumulated vast wealth. Some of the income
was dispensed in the form of aid to other underdeveloped nations whose
economies had been caught between higher prices of oil and lower prices
for their own export commodities and raw materials amid shrinking
Western demand for their goods. Much was absorbed in massive arms
purchases that exacerbated political tensions, particularly in the
Middle East.
This control of a vital commodity became known as the "oil weapon",
which came in the form of an embargo and cutbacks in oil production from
the Arab states to select industrial governments of the world to
pressure Israel during the fourth Arab-Israeli War in October 1973.
These target industrial governments included the United States, Great
Britain, Canada, Japan, and the Netherlands. In retrospect, the purpose
of the embargo, as perceived by these target governments, was to sway
their foreign policies concerning Israel towards a more pro-Arab
position by threatening to cut off exports of Arab oil, and that in
altering their policies the Arab states would respond by again allowing
their purchase of more oil.
[22] The Arab states selected their target governments to emplace their embargo, mostly affecting
European Common Market countries and Japan with an eventual 25% oil cut in production.
[23] However, in all five cases there did not appear to be a dramatic change in policy making as envisioned by the Arab states.
[24]
In the case of the United States, scholars argue that there already
existed a negotiated settlement based on equality between both parties
prior to 1973. Second, Soviet involvement in the Middle East as a threat
to becoming another superpower confrontation was of more concern to the
United States than the oil weapon. A third reason, the interest groups
and other government agencies that were more concerned with the
implications of the oil weapon held little influential power concerning
foreign policy in the Arab-Israeli conflict because of Kissinger's total
dominance over this process.
[25]
Also within the United States concerning the economic impact at the
macro level, direct correlations have been drawn between the rise in oil
prices and economic recessions. "Oil price shocks", referring to
disruptions in the production and distribution of oil, that result in
the increase of oil prices "have been held responsible for recessions,
periods of excessive inflation, reduced productivity, and lower economic
growth"
[26]
The effect of the Arab embargo had a negative influence on the U.S
economy through causing immediate demands to address the threats to
U.S. energy security.
[27]
On an international level, the price increases of petroleum disrupted
market systems in changing competitive positions. At the macro level,
economic problems consisted of both inflationary and deflationary
impacts of domestic economies.
[28]
The Arab embargo left many U.S. companies searching for new ways to
develop expensive oil, even in the elements of rugged terrain such as in
hostile arctic environments. The problem that many of these companies
faced is that finding oil and developing new oil fields usually require a
time lag of five to ten years between the planning process and
significant oil production.
[29]
Gas stealers beware, 1974
OPEC-member states in the developing world withheld the prospect of
nationalization of the companies' holdings in their countries. Most notably, the Saudis acquired operating control of
Aramco, fully nationalizing it in 1980 under the leadership of
Ahmed Zaki Yamani.
As other OPEC nations followed suit, the cartel's income soared. Saudi
Arabia, awash with profits, undertook a series of ambitious five-year
development plans, of which the most ambitious, begun in 1980, called
for the expenditure of $250 billion. Other cartel members also undertook
major economic development programs.
Meanwhile, the shock produced chaos in the West. In the United
States, the retail price of a gallon of gasoline (petrol) rose from a
national average of 38.5 cents in May 1973 to 55.1 cents in June 1974.
State governments requested citizens not to put up
Christmas lights, with
Oregon banning Christmas as well as commercial lighting altogether.
[30] Politicians called for a national gas rationing program.
[31]
Nixon requested gasoline stations to voluntarily not sell gasoline on
Saturday nights or Sundays; 90% of owners complied, which resulted in
lines on weekdays.
[30]
The embargo was not uniform across Europe. Of the nine members of the
European Economic Community
(EEC), the Netherlands faced a complete embargo, the United Kingdom and
France received almost uninterrupted supplies (having refused to allow
America to use their airfields and embargoed arms and supplies to both
the Arabs and the Israelis), whilst the other six faced only partial
cutbacks. The UK had traditionally been an ally of Israel, and
Harold Wilson's government had supported the Israelis during the
Six Day War, but his successor,
Ted Heath,
had reversed this policy in 1970, calling for Israel to withdraw to its
pre-1967 borders, although the Arab states refused to sign any peace
agreement at that period, as stated in
Khartoum Resolution.
The members of the EEC had been unable to achieve a common policy
during the first month of the Yom Kippur War. The Community finally
issued a statement on November 6, after the embargo and price rises had
begun; widely seen as pro-Arab, this statement supported the
Franco-British line on the war, and OPEC duly lifted its embargo from
all members of the EEC. The price rises had a much greater impact in
Europe than the embargo, particularly in the UK (where they combined
with strikes by coal miners and railroad workers to cause an
energy crisis over the winter of 1973–74, a major factor in the
change of government).
[32] The UK, Germany, Italy, Switzerland, and Norway banned flying, driving and boating on Sundays.
[30] Sweden rationed gasoline and heating oil.
[30] The Netherlands imposed prison sentences for those who used more than their given ration of electricity.
[30] Ted Heath asked the British to heat only one room in their houses over the winter.
[33]
A few months later, the crisis eased. The embargo was lifted in March 1974 after negotiations at the
Washington Oil Summit,
but the effects of the energy crisis lingered on throughout the 1970s.
The price of energy continued increasing in the following year, amid the
weakening competitive position of the dollar in world markets.
Price controls and rationing
Government
price controls further exacerbated the crisis in the United States,
[31]
which limited the price of "old oil" (that already discovered) while
allowing newly discovered oil to be sold at a higher price, resulting in
a withdrawal of old oil from the market and the creation of artificial
scarcity. The rule also discouraged
alternative energies or more efficient fuels or technologies from being developed.
[31] The rule had been intended to promote
oil exploration.
[34]
This scarcity was dealt with by rationing of gasoline (which occurred
in many countries), with motorists facing long lines at gas stations
beginning in summer 1972 and increasing by summer 1973.
[31]
In 1973, U.S. President
Richard Nixon named
William E. Simon
as the first Administrator of the Federal Energy Office, a short-term
organization created to coordinate the government's response to the Arab
oil embargo, who was called the "
Energy Czar".
[35]
Simon allocated states the same amount of domestic oil for 1974 that
each consumed in 1972, which worked well for states whose populations
were not increasing.
[36] In states with increased populations, lines at gasoline stations were common.
[36] The
American Automobile Association reported that in the last week of February 1974, 20% of American gasoline stations had no fuel at all.
[36]
Oregon gasoline dealers displayed signs explaining the flag policy in the winter of 1973–74
In the United States,
odd-even rationing was implemented; drivers of vehicles with
license plates having an odd number as the last digit (or a
vanity license plate)
were allowed to purchase gasoline for their cars only on odd-numbered
days of the month, while drivers of vehicles with even-numbered license
plates were allowed to purchase fuel only on even-numbered days.
[37] The rule did not apply on 31st day of those months containing 31 days, or on February 29 in
leap years— the latter never came into play, since the restrictions had been abolished by 1976.
In some U.S. states, a three-color flag system was used to denote
gasoline availability at service stations—a green flag denoted
unrationed sale of gasoline, a yellow flag denoted restricted and
rationed sales, and a red flag denoted that no gasoline was available
but the service station was open for other services.
[38]
Additionally, coupons for gasoline rationing were ordered in 1974 and
1975 for Federal Energy Administration, but were never used for this
crisis or the
1979 energy crisis.
[39]
The rationing led to incidents of violence, after truck drivers
nationwide chose to strike for two days in December 1973 because they
objected to the supplies Simon had rationed for their industry.
[36] In
Pennsylvania and
Ohio, non-striking truckers were shot at by striking truckers, and in
Arkansas, trucks of non-strikers were attacked with
bombs.
[36]
America had controlled the price of natural gas since the 1950s, and
with the inflation of the 1970s, the market price of natural gas was not
encouraging the search for new reserves.
[40] America's natural gas reserves dwindled from 237 trillion in 1974 to 203 trillion
[clarification needed] in 1978, and the price controls were not changed despite President
Gerald Ford's repeated requests to Congress.
[40]
Conservation and reduction in demand
To help reduce consumption, in 1974 a
national maximum speed limit of 55 mph (about 88 km/h) was imposed through the
Emergency Highway Energy Conservation Act. Development of the United States
Strategic Petroleum Reserve began in 1975, and in 1977, the cabinet-level
Department of Energy was created, followed by the
National Energy Act of 1978.
Year-round
daylight saving time
was implemented from January 6, 1974, to February 23, 1975. The move
spawned significant criticism because it forced many children to commute
to school before sunrise. The pre-existing daylight saving rules,
calling for the clocks to be advanced one hour on the last Sunday in
April, were restored in 1976.
Gas stations abandoned during the crisis were sometimes used for other purposes. This station at
Potlatch, Washington was turned into a
revival hall.
The crisis also prompted a call for individuals and businesses to conserve energy, most notably a campaign by the
Advertising Council using the tagline "Don't Be Fuelish".
[41]
Many newspapers carried full-page advertisements that featured cut-outs
which could be attached to light switches, reading "Last Out, Lights
Out: Don't Be Fuelish."
By 1980, there were no longer full-size luxury cars with a 130-inch (3.3 m)
wheelbase
and gross weights averaging 4,500 pounds (2,041 kg). The automakers
began phasing out the traditional front engine/rear wheel drive layout
in compact cars in favor of lighter front engine/front wheel drive
designs. And a higher percentage of cars offered the more fuel-efficient
4 cylinder engines, rather than 6 or 8 cylinder engines, a trend which
continues to this day.
Though not regulated by the new legislation, auto racing groups voluntarily began conserving as well. In 1974, the
24 Hours of Daytona was cancelled and
NASCAR reduced all race distances by 10%; the
12 Hours of Sebring race was cancelled. In 1976, the U.S. Congress created the
Weatherization Assistance Program to help low-income homeowners and renters deal with rising heating costs by reducing their demand through advanced insulation.
Secondary effects
Various secondary effects occurred, notably
toilet paper panics in
Japan and the United States; these were unfounded panics which became
self-fulfilling prophesies, and are classic examples of the
Thomas theorem.
Price rises and unfounded rumors of a toilet paper shortage—based on
oil being used in paper manufacturing—caused a panic and hoarding of
toilet paper in late October and early November in
Osaka and
Kobe, among other cities.
[42][43] In the United States,
Johnny Carson
inadvertently caused a three-week panic when, on December 19, 1973, he
read a news item regarding the U.S. government's falling behind on bids
for toilet paper and quipping that the nation faced a toilet paper
shortage on
The Tonight Show.
Search for alternatives
The energy crisis led to greater interest in
renewable energy and spurred research in
solar power and
wind power.
[44] It also led to greater pressure to exploit North American oil sources, and increased the West's dependence on coal and
nuclear power. This included increased interest in
mass transit.
In
Australia, heating oil ceased being considered an appropriate winter heating fuel.
[citation needed]
This often meant that a lot of oil-fired room heaters that were popular
from the late-1950s to the early 1970s were considered outdated.
Gas-conversion kits that let the heaters burn natural gas or
propane were introduced.
[citation needed]
The Brazilian government implemented a very large project in 1975 called "
Proálcool" (pro-alcohol) that mixed
ethanol with gasoline for automotive fuel.
[45]
Ironically, Israel was one of the few countries not affected by the
embargo, since it was able to satisfy its own energy demand by
extracting oil from the Sinai. But to supplement
Israel's over-taxed power grid,
Harry Zvi Tabor, the father of
Israel's solar industry, developed the prototype for a
solar water heater now used in over 90% of Israeli homes.
[46]
Macroeconomic effects
The 1973 oil crisis was a major factor in Japan's economy shifting
from oil-intensive industries, and resulted in huge Japanese investments
in industries such as
electronics.
The Japanese auto makers also benefited from this embargo. With fuel
costs escalating in the United States, their small, more fuel-efficient
models, began gaining market share from the "gas-guzzling" American
vehicles of the time. This triggered a drop in American auto sales that
lasted into the 1980s.
The Western nations'
central banks decided to sharply cut
interest rates
to encourage growth, deciding that inflation was a secondary concern.
Although this was the orthodox macroeconomic prescription at the time,
the resulting
stagflation
surprised economists and central bankers, and the policy is now
considered by some to have deepened and lengthened the adverse effects
of the embargo. Recent research shows that the modern economy,
represented by the period after 1985, is very resilient to energy price
increases compared with the earlier era.
[47]
The price shock created large current account deficits in the
oil-importing economies. A spontaneous petrodollar recycling mechanism
was created, through which the surplus funds accumulated by OPEC nations
were being channeled through the capital markets to the West to finance
the current account deficits. The functioning of this mechanism
required the demise of
capital controls
in the Western oil-importing economies and it is seen by scholars as
the beginning of an exponential growth of the capital markets in the
West from the 1970s onwards.
[48]
Long-term effects of the embargo are still felt. Many in the public
remain suspicious of oil companies, believing they profiteered, or even
colluded with OPEC. In 1974 seven of the fifteen top
Fortune 500 companies were oil companies.
Effects on international relations
The
Cold War
policies of the Nixon administration also suffered a major blow in the
aftermath of the oil embargo. They had focused on China and the Soviet
Union, but the latent challenge to U.S. hegemony coming from the third
world became evident. U.S. power was under attack even in Latin America.
The oil embargo was announced roughly one month after a
right-wing military coup in
Chile led by General
Augusto Pinochet toppled socialist president
Salvador Allende
on September 11, 1973. The United States' subsequent assistance to this
government did little to curb the activities of socialist
guerrillas
in the region. The response of the Nixon administration was to propose
doubling of the amount of military arms sold by the United States. As a
consequence, a Latin American bloc was organized and financed in part by
Venezuela and its oil revenues, which quadrupled between 1970 and 1975.
In addition, Western Europe and Japan began switching from pro-Israel to more pro-Arab policies.
[49][50][51]
This change further strained the Western alliance system. The United
States, which imported only 12% of its oil from the Middle East
(compared with 80% for the Europeans and over 90% for Japan), remained
staunchly committed to backing Israel. The percentage of U.S. oil which
comes from the nations bordering the Persian Gulf has remained steady
over the years, with a figure of a little more than 10% in 2008.
[52]
Although historically having no connections to the Middle East, Japan
was the most heavily dependent on its oil from this region, making up
71% of its imported oil from the Middle East in 1970. However, on
November 7, 1973, the Saudi and Kuwaiti governments declared Japan a
"nonfriendly" country directed towards changing its policy of
noninvolvement in the Arab-Israeli conflict, placing a 5% production cut
in December to Japan.
[53]
The December production cut to the Japanese government caused somewhat
of a panic, where on November 22 Japan issued a statement "asserting
that Israel should withdraw from all of the 1967 territories, advocating
Palestinian self-determination, and threatening to reconsider its
policy toward Israel if Israel refused to accept these preconditions".
[53] By December 25, Japan was considered a friendly state.
With the oil embargo in place, the industrial governments of the
world in some way altered their foreign policy regarding the
Arab-Israeli conflict and after the use of the Arab oil weapon. These
included European countries such as the UK, which decided to refuse to
allow the United States to use British bases in the UK and
Cyprus to
airlift resupplies to Israel along with the rest of the members of the
European Community.
[54]
It also included the Japanese restatement on November 22, to
"reconsider" their relations with Israel if Israel did not acknowledge
their avocations to return to their pre-1967 territorial state, although
this was never acted upon. Canada shifted towards a more pro-Arab
position after displeasure was expressed by many Arab governments
towards Canada's Middle Eastern position as one of being mostly neutral.
"On the other hand, after the embargo the Canadian government moved
quickly indeed toward the Arab position, despite its low dependence on
Middle Eastern oil".
[53]
A year after the start of the 1973 oil embargo, the nonaligned bloc
in the United Nations passed a resolution demanding the creation of a "
New International Economic Order"
in which resources, trade, and markets would be distributed more
equitably, with the local populations of nations within the global South
receiving a greater share of benefits derived from the exploitation of
southern resources, and greater respect for the right to self-directed
development in the South be afforded by the North.
Decline of OPEC
OPEC net oil export revenues for 1971–2007
[55]
Since 1973, OPEC failed to hold on to its preeminent position, and by
1981, its production was surpassed by that of other countries.
Additionally, its own member nations were divided among themselves.
Saudi Arabia, trying to gain back market share, increased production and
caused downward pressure on prices, making high-cost oil production
facilities less profitable or even unprofitable. The world price of oil,
which had reached a peak in 1979 during the
1979 energy crisis, at more than $80 per barrel, decreased during the early 1980s to $38 per barrel (239 US$/m
3).
In real prices, oil briefly fell back to pre-1973 levels. Overall, the
reduction in price was a windfall for the oil-consuming nations—United
States, Japan, Europe, and especially the third world.
Part of the decline in prices and economic and geopolitical power of
OPEC comes from the move away from oil consumption to alternate energy
sources. OPEC had relied on the famously limited
price inelasticity of oil demand[56]
to maintain high consumption but had underestimated the extent to which
other sources of supply would become profitable as the price increased.
Electricity generation from
nuclear power and natural gas, home heating from natural gas and
ethanol blended gasoline all reduced the demand for oil.
At the same time, the drop in prices represented a serious problem for oil-producing countries in northern Europe and the
Persian Gulf region. For a handful of heavily populated, impoverished countries, whose economies were largely dependent on oil—including
Mexico,
Nigeria,
Algeria, and
Libya—governments
and business leaders failed to prepare for a market reversal, the price
drop placed them in wrenching, sometimes desperate situations.
When reduced demand and over-production produced a glut on the world
market in the mid-1980s, oil prices plummeted and the cartel lost its
unity. Oil exporters such as Mexico, Nigeria, and
Venezuela,
whose economies had expanded in the 1970s, were plunged into
near-bankruptcy, and even Saudi Arabian economic power was significantly
weakened. The divisions within OPEC made subsequent concerted action
more difficult.
Nevertheless, the 1973 oil shock provided dramatic evidence of the potential power of third-world resource suppliers.
[weasel words] The vast reserves of the leading Middle East producers guaranteed the region its strategic importance, but the
politics of oil still proves dangerous for all concerned to this day.
Long-term effects
Prior to the embargo, the geo-political competition between the
Soviet Union and the United States, in combination with low oil prices
that hindered the necessity and feasibility for the West to seek
alternative energy sources, presented the Arab States with financial
security, moderate economic growth, and disproportionate international
bargaining power.
[57] Following the embargo, higher oil prices instigated new avenues for energy exploration or expansion including
Alaska, the
North Sea, the
Caspian Sea, and
Caucasus.
[58]
Soviet reaction
Prior to the ascendancy of
Anwar Sadat
to president of Egypt in 1970, the Middle East had been an important
arena in the global superpower competition, most lucidly displayed in
the arms sales and cooperation between the American and Soviet
governments with Israel, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Iran allied to The
United States, and Egypt, Syria, and Iraq allied with the Soviet Union.
Although none of these states entered into any formal alliances
comparable to the
North Atlantic Treaty Organization,
they did benefit greatly from the geopolitical competition in the
region and vacillations in alignment often resulted in greater gains of
assistance. This competitive environment, beneficial to the regional
states involved, was mitigated sharply after 1970. Sadat's dismissal of
Soviet specialists in Egypt and the dramatic price increases in
hydrocarbons hardened relations with all of the Middle East and created
new opportunities for the export of Soviet oil. Exploration in the
Caspian Basin and
Siberia
became more cost-effective. Former cooperation evolved into a far more
adversarial relationship as the Soviet Union increased oil production
and export (by 1980 the Soviet Union was the world's largest producer of
oil) to take advantage of the supply problems in the West created by
OPEC's production reductions.
[59][60] This growing economic competition turned into genuine fears of military aggression after the
1979 Soviet invasion of Afghanistan,
leaving the Persian Gulf states to look to the United States for the
type of security guarantees against Soviet military action in the
Persian Gulf that the Israelis had exclusively received only a decade
earlier.
Growing security concerns
The USSR's invasion of Afghanistan was only part of the growing
security destabilization in the Middle East, most obviously seen in the
increased sale of American weapons, technology, and outright military
presence. Saudi Arabia and Iran became increasingly dependent on
bilateral American security assurances to combat both external and
internal threats, including increased military competition between these
states because of the increased oil revenues. Both states were
seemingly competing for preeminence in the
Persian Gulf
and using increased revenues on disproportionately powerful military
forces. By 1979, Saudi weapon purchases from the United States were in
excess of five times the amount that Israel was purchasing annually.
[61]
Following the failure of the Shah during January 1979 to maintain
control of Iran, the Saudis were forced to deal with the prospect of
internal destabilization via
Islamic fundamentalism, a reality which would quickly be revealed in the
seizure of the Grand Mosque in
Mecca by
Wahhabi extremists during November and a Shia revolt in
al-Hasa during December.
[62][63] In November 2010,
WikiLeaks leaked confidential diplomatic cables pertaining to the United States and its allies which revealed that Saudi Arabian
King Abdullah urged the US to attack Iran in order to destroy its
potential nuclear weapons program, describing Iran as "a snake whose head should be cut off without any procrastination".
[64]
Impact on motor industry
Western Europe
The motor industry was one of Western Europe's most affected industries in the wake of the 1973 oil crisis.
After
World War II,
most West European countries applied heavy taxes to motor fuel because
it was imported, and as a result most cars made in Europe were small and
economical. However by the late 1960s as wealth increased car sizes
were rising despite heavy fuel taxes, although some of the more upmarket
brands were building cars that could take
lead-free fuel, and there were still a number of "economy" cars in production at this time.
But the oil crisis gradually saw many West European car buyers move away from larger, less economical cars.
[65] The most notable result of this transition in the car market was the rise in popularity of compact
hatchbacks.
The only notable small hatchbacks built in Western Europe at the time of the oil crisis were the
Peugeot 104,
Renault 5 and
Fiat 127. By the end of the decade, the market had massively expanded with the introduction of the
Ford Fiesta,
Opel Kadett (sold as the
Vauxhall Astra in Great Britain),
Chrysler Sunbeam, and
Citroën Visa.
Buyers looking for larger cars were increasingly drawn to
medium-sized hatchbacks that were virtually unknown in Europe in 1973,
but by the end of the decade were gradually replacing
saloons as the mainstay of this sector. Between 1973 and 1980, the following medium-sized hatchbacks were launched across Europe: the
Chrysler/Simca Horizon,
Fiat Ritmo (Strada in the UK),
Ford Escort MK3,
Renault 14,
Volvo 340 / 360,
Opel Kadett, and
Volkswagen Golf. These cars offered new standard of fuel economy, which were much needed in the aftermath of the oil crisis.
The new cars launched in the wake of the oil crisis were considerably
more economical than the traditional saloons they were taking the place
of, and even attracted a considerable number of buyers who would have
otherwise chosen cars in the next sector. Their success continued into
the 1980s and by the later part of the decade, some 15 years after the
oil crisis, hatchbacks almost monopolised most European small and medium
car markets, and had gained a substantial share of the large family car
market.
United States
Similarly, U.S. automakers were significantly impacted by the 1973
oil embargo and energy crisis. Before the energy crisis, large, heavy,
and powerful cars were the standard in the United States Of America. By
1971 the standard engine in a
Chevrolet Caprice was a 400-cubic inch (6.5 liter) V8. The wheelbase of this car was 121.5 inches (3,090 mm), and
Motor Trend's 1972 road test of the similar
Chevrolet Impala logged no more than 15 miles per gallon on the highway.
After the energy crisis, however, gasoline cost more and reduced the demand for large cars.
[40] Japanese imports, primarily the
Toyota Corona, the
Toyota Corolla, the
Datsun B210, the
Datsun 510, the
Honda Civic, the
Mitsubishi Galant (a captive import from Chrysler sold as the
Dodge Colt), the
Subaru DL, and later the
Honda Accord all had
four cylinder engines that were more fuel efficient in comparison to the typical
V8 and
six cylinder engines
found in North American vehicles. Honda and Subaru imports became the
early mass market automobiles with front-wheel drive—which became the
industry standard for subsequent mass market automobiles produced (from
Japanese, European, and domestic marques). From Europe, the
Volkswagen Beetle, the
Volkswagen Fastback, the
Renault 8, the
Renault LeCar, and the
Fiat Brava were also offered. As buyers began exchanging large cars for the smaller imported ones, Detroit responded with the
Ford Pinto, the
Ford Maverick, the
Chevrolet Vega, the
Chevrolet Nova, the
Plymouth Valiant, and the
Plymouth Volaré.
American Motors, prior to the 1980 partnership with Renault, have seen a
sales increase of its homegrown compacts (from the Gremlin and Hornet
lineup) which also included the Pacer. At the same time, the rising
value of the West German
Deutsche Mark (along with the
English Pound)
where European imports were being outsold by Japanese automakers where
exporting their product at a lower cost would yield profitable
gains—even to the point of
price dumping
whilst building a customer base—a trend which continues to the present
day. Sales of Japanese mass market automobiles increased during the
1979 energy crisis where in 1980 Japan became first in the world for automobile production surpassing both Detroit and Europe.
Some buyers lamented the small size of the first compacts that came
from Japan, and both Toyota and Nissan (known as Datsun during the
1970s) introduced larger cars called the
Toyota Corona Mark II, replaced by the
Toyota Cressida, the
Mazda 616, and
Datsun 810
which gave buyers increased passenger space and some luxury amenities,
such as air conditioning, power steering, AM-FM radios, and even power
windows and central locking without increasing the price of the vehicle.
These larger compacts were at the very limit of
Japanese government regulations concerning size and engine displacement so that they could still be affordable in the
Japanese domestic market,
yet offer export buyers larger cars that sacrificed fuel economy for
passenger accommodation and a higher price. Toyota also sold the
Toyota Crown
from 1965 to 1974 with very limited amount of sales. A decade after the
1973 oil crisis, Japanese manufacturers, affected by the
1981 voluntary export restraints
which limited the importation of their mass market automobiles
(establishing in the United States transplant assembly plants) decided
to import high-end luxury automobiles establishing luxury divisions
(Acura, Lexus, Infiniti) of their parent companies (Honda, Toyota,
Nissan).
Compact trucks were also introduced to the USA, with the
Toyota Hilux and the
Datsun Truck, followed by the
Mazda Truck sold as the
Ford Courier, with Isuzu selling their
compact truck as the
Chevrolet LUV. Mitsubishi also sold the
Forte as the
Dodge D-50
a few years after the oil crisis. The compact trucks were subjected to
the Chicken Tax (a 25% tariff) but the Japanese manufacturers exported
the vehicles as cab-chassis configurations without the pickup which has a
4% tariff until the loophole was closed in 1980. Mazda, Mitsubishi, and
Isuzu, which had joint partnerships with Ford, Chrysler, and GM, which
who and marketed the compact trucks, ended the
captive import
policy where the Big Three introduced their domestic replacements (Ford
Ranger, Dodge Dakota (which was introduced in 1986 as a midsize when it
was sold alongside the Power Ram 50), and the Chevrolet S10/GMC S-15).
An increase in imported cars into North America forced the Big Three (
General Motors,
Ford, and
Chrysler) to introduce smaller and fuel-efficient models for domestic sales.
[40] The
Dodge Omni /
Plymouth Horizon from Chrysler (originally developed by
Simca, a division of Chrysler Europe), the
Ford Fiesta (sourced from Ford of Europe), and the
Chevrolet Chevette
(based on GM's T platform which was marketed internationally) all had
four-cylinder engines and room for at least four passengers by the late
1970s. By 1985, the average American vehicle received 17.4 miles per
gallon, compared to 13.5 miles per gallon in 1970.
[40] The improvements stayed even though the price of a barrel of oil remained constant at $12 from 1974 to 1979.
[40]
While at the same time these new imports were major inroads in the
American market, sales of large sedans for most makes (except
Chrysler products) recovered within two model years of the 1973 oil crisis. Sales of models such as the
Cadillac DeVille,
Buick Electra,
Oldsmobile 98,
Lincoln Continental,
Mercury Marquis,
and various other luxury oriented sedans became popular again in the
mid-1970s. The only full-size models to see permanent reductions in
sales were the lower price models; such as the
Chevrolet Bel Air, and
Ford Galaxie 500. At the same time, slightly smaller, if not entirely more fuel efficient mid-size models such as the
Oldsmobile Cutlass,
Chevrolet Monte Carlo,
Ford Thunderbird and various other models sold well.
This led to the somewhat odd juxtaposition of small economical
imports introducing themselves as major elements of the market, while at
the same time heavy, expensive, largely impractical vehicles (with
7 mpg; Lincoln sold 80,321
Mark Vs
in 77) selling alongside the new imports in equally impressive numbers.
In 1976; Toyota, with an average weight around 2,100 lbs sold 346,920
cars in the United States, while Cadillac with an average weight around
5,000 lbs sold 309,139 cars.
Federal safety standards, such as NHTSA Federal Motor Vehicle Safety
Standard 215 (pertaining to safety bumpers), and compacts like the 1974
Mustang I were a prelude to the DOT "downsize" revision of vehicle
categories.
[66] By 1977, GM's full-sized cars reflected on 1973 oil crisis and preceded later DOT downsizing.
[67]
By 1979, virtually all the big "full-size" American cars were
"downsized", featuring smaller engines and smaller dimensions outside.
Chrysler ended production of their full-sized luxury sedans at the end of the 1981 model year, moving instead to a full
front-wheel drive lineup for 1982 (except for the
M-body Dodge Diplomat/
Plymouth Gran Fury and
Chrysler New Yorker Fifth Avenue sedans).
See also
References
- "OPEC Oil Embargo 1973–1974". U.S. Department of State, Office of the Historian. Retrieved August 30, 2012.
- "The price of oil – in context". CBC News. Archived from the original on June 9, 2007. Retrieved May 29, 2007.
- "CHE | Responding to Crisis". Envhist.wisc.edu. April 26, 2010. Retrieved August 7, 2012.
- Perron, P.; University, Princeton; Program, Econometric Research (1988). "The Great Crash, the Oil Price Shock and the Unit Root Hypothesis" (PDF). Econometric Research Program, Princeton University Princeton, New Jersey. Retrieved February 3, 2012.[dead link]
- Kepel, Gilles (2006). "Building Petro-Islam on the Ruins of Arab Nationalism". Jihad: The Trail of Political Islam. I.B. Tauris. p. 51.
had
been amply demonstrated during the oil embargo against the United
States, following the Arab-Israeli war of 1973. This show of
international power, along with the nation's astronomical increase in
wealth, allowed Saudi Arabia's puritanical, conservative Wahhabite
faction to attain a preeminent position of strength in the global
expression of Islam. Saudi Arabia's impact on Muslims throughout the
world was less visible than that of Khomeini's Iran, but the effect was
deeper and more enduring. The kingdom seized the initiative from
progressive nationalism, which had dominated the 1960s, it reorganized
the religious landscape by promoting those associations and ulemas who
followed its lead, and then, by injecting substantial amounts of money
into Islamic interests of all sorts, it won over many more converts.
Above all, the Saudis raised a new standard -- the virtuous Islamic
civilization -- as a foil for the corrupting influence of the West,
while still managing to remain a staunch ally of the United Sates and
the West against the Soviet bloc.
- "The hidden face of oil".
- "The hidden face of oil".
during the interview at 24:10 in the documentary La face cachée du pétrole part 2
- Masouros, Pavlos E.,
"Corporate Law and Economic Stagnation: How Shareholder Value and
Short-termism Contribute to the Decline of the Western Economies",
Eleven International Publishing (2013), pp. 55–57
- Taghizadegan, Rahim; Stöferle, Ronald; Stöferle, Mark (13 Jun 2014). Österreichische Schule für Anleger: Austrian Investing zwischen Inflation und Deflation (in German). FinanzBuch Verlag. p. 87. ISBN 9783862485949.
Unsere
Mitgliedslander werden alle notwendigen Schritte unternehmen und/oder
Verhandlungen mit den Olfirmen fuhren, am Mittel und Wege zu finden, um
nachteiligen Auswirkungen auf das Realeinkommen der Mitgliedslander, die
sich aus den internationalen monetaren Entwicklungen per August 15,
1971 ergeben, entgegenzuwirken.
- Hammes, David. and Douglas Wills. "Black Gold: The End of Bretton Woods and the Oil-Price Shocks of the 1970s," The Independent Review, v. IX, n. 4, Spring 2005. pp. 501–511.
- Energy Insights: News: Oil price – speculation and international politics at play Archived July 23, 2011 at the Wayback Machine
- Smith, William. D. "Price Quadruples for Iranian Crude Oil at Auction", New York Times December 12, 1973.
- Daniel Yergin, The Prize: The Epic Quest for Oil, Money, and Power (New York: Simon and Schuster, 2008), p. 587.
- Daniel Yergin, The Prize: The Epic Quest for Oil, Money, and Power (New York: Simon and Schuster, 2008), p. 589.
- Lenczowski, George (1990). American Presidents and the Middle East. Duke University Press. p. 130. ISBN 978-0-8223-0972-7.
- "Significant Events in U.S.-Libyan Relations". 2001-2009.state.gov. Retrieved August 7, 2012.
- Daniel Yergin, The Prize: The Epic Quest for Oil, Money, and Power (New York: Simon and Schuster, 2008), p. 590.
- Lenczowski, p130
- Frum, David (2000). How We Got Here: The '70s. New York: Basic Books. p. 318. ISBN 978-0-465-04195-4.
- Daniel Yergin, The Prize: The Epic Quest for Oil, Money, and Power (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1991), p. 597.
- Editorial Note: this
conflicts somewhat with the 70% price increase to $5.11, noted by a
cited reference, in the paragraph above.
- Licklider, Roy (1988). "The Power of Oil: The Arab Oil Weapon and the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, Canada, Japan, and the United States". International Studies Quarterly (International Studies Quarterly, Vol. 32, No. 2) 32 (2): 205–226 [p. 206]. doi:10.2307/2600627. JSTOR 2600627.
- Paust, Jordan J. & Blaustein, Albert P. (1974). "The Arab Oil Weapon—A Threat to International Peace". The American Journal of International Law (The American Journal of International Law, Vol. 68, No. 3) 68 (3): 410–439 [p. 411]. doi:10.2307/2200513. JSTOR 2200513.
- Licklider (1988), p. 217.
- Licklider (1988), pp. 217, 219.
- Barsky, Robert B. & Kilian, Lutz (2004). "Oil and the Macroeconomy since the 1970s". The Journal of Economic Perspectives 18 (4): 115–134 [p. 115]. doi:10.1257/0895330042632708.
- Ikenberry, G. John (1986). "The Irony of State Strength: Comparative Responses to the Oil Shocks in the 1970s". International Organization 40 (1): 105–137 [p. 107]. doi:10.1017/S0020818300004495.
- Ikenberry (1986), p. 109.
- Hirsch, Robert L. (1987). "Impending United States Energy Crisis". Science 235 (4795): 1467–1473 [p. 1467]. doi:10.1126/science.235.4795.1467. PMID 17775008.
- Frum, David (2000). How We Got Here: The 1970s. New York: Basic Books. p. 318. ISBN 978-0-465-04195-4.
- Frum, David (2000). How We Got Here: The 1970s. New York: Basic Books. p. 313. ISBN 978-0-465-04195-4.
- Slavin, Barbara; Freudenheim, Milt; Rhoden, William C. (January 24, 1982). "The World; British Miners Settle for Less". New York Times. Retrieved April 20, 2010.
- Frum, David (2000). How We Got Here: The 1970s. New York: Basic Books. p. 319. ISBN 978-0-465-04195-4.
- "Oil Price Controls: A Counterproductive Effort" (PDF). Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Review. November 1975. Retrieved June 7, 2010.
- Frum, David (2000). How We Got Here: The 1970s. New York: Basic Books. pp. 312–313. ISBN 978-0-465-04195-4.
- Frum, David (2000). How We Got Here: The 1970s. New York: Basic Books. p. 320. ISBN 978-0-465-04195-4.
- "Gas Fever: Happiness Is a Full Tank". Time Magazine. February 18, 1974. Retrieved June 7, 2010.
- "Spotty Local Starts". Time Magazine. February 25, 1974. Retrieved June 7, 2010.
- "Rationing Coupons Shredded". New York Times. June 2, 1984. Retrieved June 7, 2010.
- Frum, David (2000). How We Got Here: The 1970s. New York: Basic Books. pp. 321–322. ISBN 978-0-465-04195-4.
- Ad Council – Don't be Fuelish. January 1975. Retrieved August 23, 2009.
- Oil crisis deja vu, Yomiuri Shimbun, 2000-12-03, English translation
- Diminishing welfare: a cross-national study of social provision, by Marguerite G. Rosenthal, p. 305
- The 1970s Energy Crisis
- Milton Briquet Bastos (June 20, 2007). "Brazil’s Ethanol Program – An Insider’s View". Energy Tribune. Retrieved August 14, 2008.
- At the Zenith of Solar Energy, Neal Sandler,BusinessWeek, March 26, 2008.
- Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta, How Resilient Is the Modern Economy to Energy Price Shocks?, 2006
- Masouros, Pavlos E.,
"Corporate Law and Economic Stagnation: How Shareholder Value and
Short-termism Contribute to the Decline of the Western Economies",
Eleven International Publishing (2013), pp. 60–62
- America, Russia, and the Cold War, 1945–1975, p. 280, Walter LaFeber, Wiley, 1975
- Far Eastern Economic Review, v.84, Apr–Jun 1974, p. 8, Review Publishing, 1974
- The New Tensions in Japan, Martin Collick, Richard Storry, p. 16, Institute for the Study of Conflict, 1974
- Afshin Molavi, "Obama, Gulf Oil and the Myth of America's Addiction", New America Foundation, The National (United Arab Emirates), January 21, 2009, . Retrieved August 16, 2009. Archived August 21, 2009.
- The
Power of Oil: The Arab Oil Weapon and the Netherlands, the United
Kingdom, Canada, Japan, and the United States Roy Licklider
International Studies Quarterly, Vol. 32, No. 2 (Jun. 1988), pp. 214.
- The Power of Oil:
The Arab Oil Weapon and the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, Canada,
Japan, and the United States Roy Licklider International Studies
Quarterly, Vol. 32, No. 2 (Jun. 1988), pp. 216.
- "EIA – 1000 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20585". Eia.doe.gov. Retrieved September 3, 2011.[dead link]
- Anderson, Patrick L. (November 13, 1997). "Approx. PED of Various Products (U.S.)". Mackinac.org. Archived from the original on July 21, 2011. Retrieved September 3, 2011.
- Ritchie Ovendale, The Origins of the Arab-Israeli Wars (New York: Pearson Longman, 2004), p. 184-191 and 197
- Daniel Yergin, The Prize: The Epic Quest for Oil, Money, and Power (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1991), p. 619-625
- "World: Saudis Edge U.S. on Oil" in Washington Post January 3, 1980 pg. D2
- Dusko Doder "Soviet Production of Gas, Oil Set Records Over 6 Months" in Washington Post August 14, 1980 pg. A24
- George C. Wilson "U.S. Military Sales To Saudis 5 Times Total For Israelis", Washington Post October 11, 1979 pg. A24
- Ian Rutledge Addicted To Oil: America's Relentless Drive For Energy Security (New York: I.B. Tauris, 2005), p. 47
- Daniel Yergin, The Prize: The Epic Quest for Oil, Money, and Power (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1991), p. 609
- "Wikileaks and Iran". Chicago Tribune. November 29, 2010. Retrieved April 18, 2013.
- http://www.autonews.com/article/20131014/GLOBAL/131019959/10-ways-the-1973-oil-embargo-changed-the-industry
- "Designing Cars of the 1970s: Freedoms Lost". Collectible Automobile. February 2008.
- "GM's full-sized cars". Collectible Automobile. March 2008.
Further reading
- Ammann, Daniel (2009). The King of Oil: The Secret Lives of Marc Rich. New York: St. Martin‘s Press. ISBN 978-0-312-57074-3.
- Alan S. Blinder, Economic Policy and the Great Stagflation (New York: Academic Press, 1979)
- Otto Eckstein, The Great Recession (Amsterdam: North-Holland, 1979)
- Mark E. Rupert and David P. Rapkin, "The Erosion of U.S. Leadership Capabilities"
- Paul M. Johnson and William R. Thompson, eds., Rhythms in Politics and Economics (New York: Praeger, 1985)
External links
No comments:
Post a Comment