The OPEC logo pictured ahead of an informal meeting between members of OPEC) in Algiers on September 28 2016. Picture: REUTERS/RAMZI BOUDIA
The OPEC logo pictured ahead of an informal meeting between members of OPEC) in Algiers on September 28 2016. Picture: REUTERS/RAMZI BOUDIA

Opec’s historic output agreement may be teetering on the verge of collapse. It wouldn’t be in the interests of a single cartel member, but then nor was letting that last deal implode in March. Ignoring the risk of another breakdown seems blinkered.

What was meant to be a pretty straightforward Opec meeting broke up spectacularly on Monday. So they pushed back a gathering with their Opec+ allies from Tuesday to Thursday to allow themselves more time to try reaching agreement internally first.

It’s hard to believe things are so tense, given that there appeared to be little argument about the need to delay a planned tapering of the output cuts while economies are still roiled by the coronavirus. Adding 1.9-million barrels a day of supply to the market from the start of January would be a reckless gamble given the recovery in oil demand remains patchy. Bloated stockpiles of crude and refined products need to be drawn down before pumping more oil.

The disagreement is more fundamental to the group’s inner workings. It appears to hinge on conditions demanded by the United Arab Emirates that Opec’s de facto leader, Saudi Arabia, finds unacceptable: That all the countries that have failed to comply with their targets so far continue to make up for it next year.

It’s no secret that the UAE is unhappy with its own output quota, which it regards as tougher than those imposed on fellow members, and that it’s eager to use more of its newly installed production capacity before oil demand starts to wane again.

The real sticking point is its demand that those noncompliant countries continue to make deeper compensatory cuts next year. And that’s a long list, which includes Iraq, Russia, Gabon, Nigeria and Kazakhstan.

On the surface, it’s difficult to see why that’s contentious. Saudi Arabia’s energy minister, Abdulaziz Bin Salman, has been at the forefront of insisting on compensation cuts from laggards. He very publicly reprimanded his Emirati counterpart, Suhail Al-Mazrouei, for the UAE’s own overproduction in July and August. And that seems to be part of the problem. The Emiratis quickly made up for their transgression with deeper cuts in September and October, but others failed to do so. Now it appears Saudi Arabia is willing to give them a free pass.

Disproportionate share

Keeping Russia and Iraq on board with the deal, even if they’re not fully complying, may be better than losing them altogether by pushing them too hard. Russia, by far Opec’s largest external ally, hasn’t even been asked to acknowledge its overproduction, let alone compensate for it.

The longer it goes on, this latest Opec+ deal, for all the dressing up with full compliance and compensation cuts, is starting to look like the Opec deals of old, in which the rich countries of the Arabian Peninsula carried a disproportionate share of the burden, while their poorer partners often ignored their own quotas.

The UAE maybe just may be getting tired of its support for the status quo being taken for granted.

The current wisdom among traders and analysts is that a compromise will be found. US benchmark West Texas Intermediate closed flat on Monday and is little changed from where it opened on Tuesday. The Opec+ meeting’s delay certainly suggests that’s what they’re trying to do. But that view seems based, at least partly, on an assumption that the group will do almost anything to avoid a repeat of the collapse of the previous deal in March.

However, the risk of the deal breaking down, though perhaps relatively small, is not negligible and the price of failure is huge. Last time the Opec+ deal collapsed, crude prices soon followed as producers opened the taps to compete with each other for markets. Setting aside WTI’s brief, but spectacular dive below zero, prices still went as low as $10 a barrel.

The slump may not be as severe a second time round. Demand isn’t collapsing, coronavirus vaccines are on the way and producers may still show some restraint, even without an agreement. But a drop of $10-$15 a barrel is easily possible.

Nobody thought the first Opec+ deal would fall apart — until it did. And nobody seems to think this one will collapse either. Let’s hope they’re right.


Would you like to comment on this article or view other readers' comments?
Register (it’s quick and free) or sign in now.

Speech Bubbles

Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.