On December 21, 1975, six armed terrorists led by the Venezuelan militant known as Carlos the Jackal stormed a conference room in Vienna full of the world’s most powerful oil ministers. The leader walked straight up to two men he’d been ordered to execute before the night was out: Saudi Arabia’s Ahmed Zaki Yamani and Iran’s Jamshid Amuzegar.
Advertisement
Yamani — the man who had just finished engineering the most devastating economic shock of the 20th century, who had brought the US government to its knees and turned desert kingdoms into the richest nations on Earth — was now sitting with a gun to his head, inside the very organization he’d helped build.
That moment is worth holding onto, because it captures the entire 65-year story of OPEC in miniature: power seized, power threatened, and power that quietly leaks away when nobody’s watching. And in 2026, something happened that would have been unthinkable to OPEC’s founders — one of its most important members simply walked out the door.
Chapter 1: A World Before OPEC Existed
To understand what OPEC actually achieved, you first need to understand what came before it. From the 1940s through the 1970s, global oil was controlled by seven dominant companies nicknamed the “Seven Sisters” — mostly American and British firms including predecessors of BP, Shell, Chevron, and ExxonMobil. By the mid-1950s, these companies controlled roughly 90% of oil production and sales across the Western world outside the US.
The countries sitting on that oil — Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Iran, Kuwait, Venezuela — kept roughly half the revenue. The companies decided everything else: the price, the pace of extraction, the pace of development. It was called a “partnership,” though the countries had essentially no say in the terms.
In 1959, the Seven Sisters simply announced a price cut for Venezuelan and Middle Eastern oil — the second time they’d done so — with no negotiation and no consent. Venezuela’s oil minister, Pablo Pérez Alfonso, and a Saudi official named Abdullah Tariki, both furious about the arrangement, met at a conference in Cairo and began making plans. In September 1960, representatives from Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and Venezuela met in Baghdad and, within four days, founded the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries.
On paper, OPEC was a giant from day one, representing countries that controlled more than three-quarters of the world’s oil exports. In practice, it took over a decade to become genuinely powerful — spending the 1960s essentially as a lobbying group, managing to stop prices from falling further but unable to actually raise them.
Chapter 2: The Man Who Saw It Coming — And The Structural Flaw Nobody Wanted to Admit
Ahmed Zaki Yamani became Saudi Arabia’s oil minister in 1962 at just 31 years old and held the position for 25 years — the longest tenure of any OPEC minister in history. He was quiet, precise, western-suited, and thought in decades rather than headlines.
Yamani identified something early that most of his peers ignored: OPEC’s biggest enemy was never really low demand. It was what high prices themselves create — alternatives, new producers, conservation, innovation. Every time OPEC pushed prices up, it was quietly funding the search for a replacement for oil. “The Stone Age did not end because the world ran out of stones,” he said in 1973. “The oil age will end long before we run out of oil.” He was right — but it would cost him his career, and take decades to fully play out.
There was a second flaw baked into OPEC from its very first meeting, one economists call the “prisoner’s dilemma.” Every member country wanted higher prices, which required everyone collectively producing less. But each country also wanted to produce and sell as much as possible for itself. The rational move for any one country was always to quietly pump more than its agreed quota — and when every country reasoned the same way, prices would collapse, and trust would evaporate, forcing everyone back to the negotiating table to set new limits that would, inevitably, get broken again. This single dynamic — solidarity in principle, cheating in practice — is the thread that runs through OPEC’s entire history.
Chapter 3: October 1973 — The Week Oil Became a Weapon
On October 6, 1973, Egypt and Syria attacked Israel in what became known as the Yom Kippur War. When the United States sent Israel emergency military aid, Arab OPEC members responded with an oil embargo against the US and its allies.
The numbers that followed are almost hard to believe. At an OPEC summit in Kuwait on October 16, 1973, the price of oil jumped from roughly $3 to over $5 a barrel — just the opening move. By December 1973, it had reached $11.65. By the time the embargo ended in March 1974, oil had roughly quadrupled from its pre-crisis level.
The effects rippled through everyday life across the West. American retail gasoline prices jumped 40% in a single month. The UK, Germany, Italy, Switzerland, and Norway banned driving on Sundays. Sweden rationed gasoline and heating oil. The Netherlands threatened prison sentences for citizens who used more than their allotted electricity. The US economy shrank by roughly 2.5%, and the country entered a severe recession that lasted until 1975.
What actually happened, at its core, was that for the first time in OPEC’s history, producing nations set the price of their own oil independently — without negotiating with, or asking permission from, the corporations that had controlled that decision for decades. It was, in the truest sense, a moment of sovereignty. Yamani became its public face, traveling through Europe, the US, and Japan as the calm, eloquent spokesman explaining to a shocked world that the embargo was real, serious, and tied to a political resolution in the Middle East.
Chapter 4: The Prisoner’s Dilemma Comes Home to Roost
Through the rest of the 1970s, OPEC kept cutting production and prices kept climbing — by 1980, crude was roughly ten times its 1973 price, further fueled by panic following Iran’s 1979 revolution. But those high prices were doing exactly what Yamani had warned about: making it economically viable to drill for oil in places that had never made financial sense before — the North Sea, Alaska, Mexico, the Soviet Union. Every extra dollar OPEC added to the price of a barrel was effectively subsidizing its own future competitors.
As non-OPEC supply flooded in through the early 1980s, OPEC members responded not by cutting production together, but by quietly cheating on their quotas. Saudi Arabia, as the group’s designated “swing producer,” absorbed almost the entire burden of cutting output to defend prices — slashing its own production by roughly 76%, from over 10 million barrels a day in 1980 to just 2.4 million by August 1985, while other members kept overproducing and pocketing the difference.
Advertisement
Yamani had seen enough. In late 1985, Saudi Arabia abandoned the strategy of propping up prices and instead flooded the market to reclaim market share — effectively declaring war on the cheaters inside its own cartel. Prices collapsed by more than half within months, ushering in roughly 14 years of comparatively cheap oil. Yamani was dismissed as oil minister in October 1986 after falling out with the Saudi royal family over the very policy failures he had spent two decades warning about. The man who had run OPEC for a quarter-century and survived an armed hostage crisis was let go with a terse announcement in the Saudi press.
Chapter 5: A New Kind of Alliance — And a New Kind of Threat
By the mid-2010s, OPEC faced a challenge its founders never anticipated: American shale oil. The fracking boom — the very alternative Yamani had predicted decades before, funded indirectly by OPEC’s own high prices — nearly doubled US oil production and turned the country from a net importer into a major exporter. OPEC alone could no longer meaningfully move global prices.
The response, in 2016, was unprecedented: Saudi Arabia and Russia — longtime rivals — agreed to coordinate production cuts, forming what’s now called “OPEC+.” It worked well for a few years, stabilizing and lifting prices. Then, in March 2020, as COVID-19 collapsed global oil demand, Russia refused to agree to deeper cuts, and Saudi Arabia responded by flooding the market out of frustration. Crude prices collapsed from around $50 to roughly $10 a barrel, and for a brief, surreal period in April 2020, oil futures actually traded negative — producers paying buyers to take oil off their hands because storage had run out. OPEC+ eventually agreed to historic production cuts, and prices recovered, but the underlying dynamic — everyone needing higher prices, everyone hoping someone else cuts more — never went away. In November 2024, analysts accused the UAE of exceeding its agreed quota by roughly 700,000 barrels a day, prompting concern that its quota-busting would undermine the entire group’s efforts to support prices.
Chapter 6: The UAE Walks Out
On April 28, 2026, the United Arab Emirates announced it was leaving both OPEC and OPEC+, effective May 1 — ending 59 years of membership. It’s since been widely described as the most significant fracture in OPEC’s history, marking the first time a major producer has simply chosen to leave the table rather than continue negotiating its constraints from within.
The frustration had been building for years. The UAE had invested roughly $150 billion expanding its production capacity toward nearly 5 million barrels a day, while its OPEC quota kept it capped at closer to 3.5 million — meaning Abu Dhabi was paying to build capacity it wasn’t allowed to actually use. Tensions with Saudi Arabia over that quota had simmered for years, and the broader 2026 war between the US-Israel coalition and Iran made the underlying rupture impossible to ignore: Iran, a fellow OPEC member, was simultaneously launching missile and drone attacks on the UAE and disrupting Gulf shipping through the Strait of Hormuz — severely limiting the UAE’s own ability to export oil regardless of any quota. According to US Energy Information Administration data, the Hormuz disruption alone pushed the UAE’s actual output down to roughly 1.9 million barrels a day by March 2026, far below its real capacity.
In its official announcement, the UAE framed the departure around its own “long-term strategic and economic vision and evolving energy profile,” while stating it would continue to act as a “responsible producer.” Analysts read it more bluntly: Abu Dhabi had increasingly come to see its OPEC quota not as a shared good, but as a tax paid to benefit Saudi Arabia’s budget needs specifically, while its own economy had diversified further and faster than the group’s production limits reflected.
Chapter 7: Where Things Stand Now
Since the UAE’s exit took effect in May, it has continued rerouting oil around the Strait of Hormuz closure via the Abu Dhabi Crude Oil Pipeline to Fujairah, a route with roughly 1.8 million barrels a day of current capacity that the UAE has said it intends to double by 2027. Freed from OPEC’s quota framework, the UAE has stated plans to expand its own production capacity toward 5 million barrels a day by 2027 — a direct competitive move that Saudi Arabia and the rest of OPEC+ cannot easily match without further weakening their own pricing strategy.
The wider consequences are still playing out. OPEC+’s combined share of global oil production has continued sliding — down to around 46% in 2025–2026, compared to 53% when the expanded group first formed in 2016, and a world away from the roughly 56% share OPEC commanded back in 1973. Analysts are divided on whether the UAE’s departure opens the door for further members to follow, but the general assessment is that OPEC will likely survive in some form — just in a visibly weaker and less unified shape than before.
Chapter 8: The Lesson That Took 65 Years to Fully Land
Ahmed Zaki Yamani lived to be 90, passing away in 2021, having spent much of his retirement watching the organization he helped build do precisely what he’d warned it would: overreach, fund its own competition into existence, and slowly bleed away the market power it had seized so dramatically in 1973.
The deepest lesson of OPEC’s history isn’t that cartels inevitably fail — it’s that collective action among sovereign nations is always temporary by nature. Every member agrees with the principle of restraint; every member eventually defects on the practice, because they are governments accountable to real citizens who want jobs, hospitals, and affordable fuel — not corporations with a single shared bottom line. OPEC has survived 65 years not by eliminating that tension, but by staying more useful to its members than the alternative of going it alone. The UAE’s departure is simply the first time a major member looked at that calculation and concluded the alternative had become the better deal.
Why This Matters for Namibia
Namibia is not an OPEC member and, as an emerging producer rather than a legacy one, is unlikely to ever face the same quota-versus-capacity tension that just pushed the UAE out the door. But the underlying lesson travels well: even the most powerful collective arrangements between resource-rich nations are only as strong as each member’s ongoing calculation that cooperation beats going alone. As Namibia negotiates its own long-term fiscal terms with Total Energies, Chevron, and the rest of the companies now competing for its oil, the OPEC story is a reminder that today’s carefully balanced deal is never permanently settled — it holds only for as long as it remains the best available option for everyone still sitting at the table.