Mohammed the Persian

It's January 1968, Britain announces that it will leave territories east of the Suez, including the Gulf states that have had extensive treaty deals with the British.

From this time on, the Trucial States (the present-day UAE), Bahrain and Qatar had engaged in talks to establish a nine-member federation of Gulf states. At one point, this union seemed to materialize.



However, Iranian opposition, spirited by the Shah's claim on Bahrain through historical links (Bahrain being a part of the Sassanian, Parthian, Safavid empires), hampered Bahrain's bid to join the union. Qatar and the other 7 emirates did not want Bahrain to join because they didn't want Iranian hostility (in fact,Zayed the ruler of Abu Dhabi had stated that "all the Arab governments lined up together, could not face the Iranian forces")[1]

The 8 Arab states gave Bahrain a 3-month deadline, on 12 December 1969, to solve the Iranian issue or face exclusion from the union.[2]

Iran took the sovereignty issue to the UN and Bahrain's sovereignty had only been solved in 1970 when a UN-sponsored plebiscite (with Iranian approval) in Bahrain revealed an overwhelming desire for independence as an Arab state. The Shah later renounced Iranian claims on the island state.

However, Bahrain became emboldened by this. No longer hounded by Iranian claims over sovereignty, Bahrain opposed the idea of placing the capital at the Abu Dhabi - Dubai border and pushed for the prospective Union council to be based on the population sizes of the territories. Needless to say, these proposals were rejected by all the emirates except Sharjah and Abu Dhabi.

Bahrain, frustrated over disagreements of representation, exited talks and declared independence on August 15, 1971. Regional disputes later led to Qatar to withdraw from talks and declare independence on the 3rd of September, 1971.

My question is; How different would the region be if the 9 emirates joined together in a federation ?

Reference:

1 - Britain's Revival and Fall in the Gulf: Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, and the Trucial States, 1950-71 ,Simon C. Smith, p. 98.
2 - Smith, p. 98.

Mohammed the Persian

Nothing ?

Shaheen

Well i guess if these countries were united they would be stronger in all ways and wouldn't need to feel as "dominated" by Iran and Saudi Arabia.

How are the relations between the royal families of the emirates? Between the Thanis in Qatar and Nayhan and Makhtoums and the rest. Any rivalries between them? If such a state were to function you would need all the families to work together. Otherwise foreigners would be quick to make use of rivalries.

Fire_Raven

Sorry MtP not enough knowledge to really say how things might be different.

infestør

imho that union wouldn't last much. some participating monarchs/emirs would fight, for they wouldn't want to share their oil wealth with other emirates anymore.

Mohammed the Persian

Actually, each side in the negotiations had rivalries.

Wary Saudi Arabia did not want the current-state of 7 emirates because of Abu Dhabi (it wanted the union's power to be diluted amongst the other 8 would-be emirates).
As discussed in my previous post, Iran did not want Bahrain to join until the sovereignty dispute was solved.

Doha had a rivalry with Abu Dhabi, especially since Abu Dhabi proposed the union to start with the absorption of Dubai into Abu Dhabi. The 9 emirates were already divided over how negotiations should occur, with Bahrain, Abu Dhabi, Sharjah, Ajman and Umm al Qaiwan advocating for a constitution to be drafted first while Dubai, Qatar (and less enthusiastically), Ras al-Khaimah wanted the emirates to choose a leader directly and establish the location of a capital.

So yes, it is fair to say that the emirates had their issues.