1) The oil resources would have been exploited because there was an oil company had already had rights to the fields. Before the war one of the shareholders was German, after the war French. Both pushed for development.You know, this has probably been posted before, but meh. In a world where either WWI was delayed, averted, or the Ottomans simply never entered, how long would it take for the oil resources to be exploited and how big of an impact would it make. Also, would this fuel (no pun intended) the conquest of more areas, such as whatever was going on in Saudi Arabia at the time, or perhaps lead to a war with the UK or another power?
1) The oil resources would have been exploited because there was an oil company had already had rights to the fields. Before the war one of the shareholders was German, after the war French. Both pushed for development.
2) The UK had no reason to get in a war with the Ottoman Empire over oil because it had sown up the Persian fields.
Not encroaching, merely providing protection. Kuwait was already under British protection and once the Saudis had carved out Saudi Arabia as we know it, they did the same.The conflict I was for seeing was over the rest of the Arabian penensula, as the UK was already incroaching there.
Well yes of course it would, but HOW LONG would it take to get into full swing?
The conflict I was for seeing was over the rest of the Arabian penensula, as the UK was already incroaching there.
Not encroaching, merely providing protection. Kuwait was already under British protection and once the Saudis had carved out Saudi Arabia as we know it, they did the same.
Given that France did not launch an invasion on OTL in spite of being locked out of the Saudi oil and the USA has no reason to because they have lots of their own oil, that leaves Germany. If they win WW1 they get theBalkan and Iraqi oil. If they lose then they are not in a position to invade any country in the Middle East.
Assuming the Ottoman Empire stayed intact and the bulk of their empire wasn't taken over by other European powers:
They would have had access to the bulk of the Middle East's reserves. The Sudan, in particular, was full of it. Although nominally Egyptian (assuming it was never a joint condominium between Britain and the Egyptian Khedivate, or the British withdrew at some point), the Ottomans would have most likely pressed for reduced Egyptian autonomy to access rich African territories.
Iraq was fully Ottoman until the very end, and that would have been where a lot of the action would have happened.
I also see the Ottomans annexing much of Arabia. Even without the oil-rich Trucial Sheikhdoms dotted along the Trucial Cost, the Arabian hinterland was, and is, a treasure chest bursting with oil.
And of course, assuming the Italian-Ottoman War had never happened, Tripoli (Libya) would have been another lucrative source for the Ottomans.
This is a difficult question. The Entente victory led to a reorganization of the oil company granted a concession to remove German interests in favor of American and to a lesser extent French and British interests.
Also, the British interests involved saw Mesopotamia as a "strategic reserve" for their already-developed fields in Persia.
In general, though, the war gave the Ottomans a much stronger hand than they had had previously, so they might very well have forced the issue by threatening to cancel concessions.
Regarding Arabia, the Saudis had evicted the Ottomans from the Hasa (the oil-rich coast of the Persian Gulf), but if not for entering the war, the Ottomans would have certainly and easily regained this area, and probably worked to consolidate greater control over the interior as well.
So, when Arabian oil is discovered, it's going to be Ottoman.
I think in a case where the Ottomans stay out, even Kuwait is an open issue. If the war is dragging on, restoration of full sovereignty by the Ottomans might seem like a very small price to pay for a friendly empire.
There is very little benefit to Britain to see Arabia detached from the empire, as it's a lot easier to deal with one government than several, especially one that they have influence with as opposed to a fairly unpredictable Saudi regime, and direct control over the area is a huge waste of resources for an already wobbly empire.