So, what would your life be like today if OPEC had not extended the production cuts in late November “as expected?” What if OPEC had said, “You know, we’re tired of giving up market share to U.S. shale, which fills all of our generous production declines with new U.S. volumes, and we’re going to end this once and for all. We’re going to produce all we want and let the market work itself out.” (Does that sound a bit like the Thanksgiving surprise announcement by OPEC in 2014?) Where would the price of crude stand a month or so later? In freefall, surpassing $40 WTI to the downside once again?

What if OPEC had convened and done the unexpected? It wouldn’t have been pretty, I’ll tell you.

In the weeks leading up to the semiannual gathering of oil-producing countries—which for the past year have agreed to and successfully implemented individual cuts in production to work down the global crude supply glut—the U.S. oil industry was feeling rather gleeful. Since early summertime, responding to the anticipated falling inventory levels, the price of oil has steadily rebounded from somewhere in the low $40s to a level enticingly close to $60 WTI.

After two years of tuning up efficiencies, any price north of $50 is a welcome respite from the cold months of the downturn, and $60 would turn on most shale plays and maybe even disturb the offshore slumber.

In third-quarter conference calls, operators alluded to cautious ramps in capex in the upcoming year, careful not to frighten investors who are wary of an all-out production blitzkrieg, but they also hedged heavily as prices are the best they’ve seen in two years. Leading up to the impending OPEC meeting, a sense of optimism pervaded the land. What could go wrong?

Well, nothing, it turns out. At least not yet. OPEC extended the production curtailments along with non-OPEC countries including Russia through 2018. It even brought Libya and Nigeria into the fold, previously exempted, to agree to caps. All is well for now and until it’s not.

Was the curtailment deal—and this comforting oil price stability—ever at risk of being abandoned?

I posed the question to Jeff Quigley, Stratas Advisors director of energy markets, and who attended the OPEC meeting to report for Hart Energy. Why was the world so confident OPEC wouldn’t act differently?

First, OPEC views the cuts as wildly successful, considering the price of Brent was well above $60 per barrel (bbl) at the time of the meeting. “That’s exactly what they wanted,” he said.

The decision to instill production cuts a year ago was a huge gamble and risky experiment for the cartel, Quigley said. Could U.S. shale fill the gap? The answer we know now is no. Despite U.S. production growth as prices rose this past year, it wasn’t enough to fill the void; inventories dropped nonetheless. And with global demand expected to grow by 1.5 MMbbl/d per year over the next several years, OPEC doesn’t believe shale can keep the pace.

“Their whole bet was shale couldn’t fill the gap, and they were right. In the second half of the year when you saw barrels pulling out of storage, that’s when OPEC knew they had done the right thing. That really influenced their decision.”

Second, he said, OPEC lost its leverage when Saudi crown prince Mohammed bin Salman revealed his country wanted high prices to support a number of social and economic projects.

“The Saudis showed their hand. They need the price; they don’t have a choice. The short-term value of having the price higher made clear to OPEC members that ending [the curtailments] was not possible.”

The wildcard in this game is Russia, which is not happy at all, Quigley said. The non-OPEC honorary member has been the linchpin in holding the cuts together and, with prices now higher, is losing significant and much-needed economic output via higher production.

“The political will is breaking down. They don’t want the deal to end completely, but they don’t want to be a participant. And they have more leverage now.”

Russia pledges 300,000 bbl/d of the total 1.8 MMbbl/d of agreed cuts.

While Russia might bail from the deal come the next meeting in June, Quigley expects the curtailment agreement, at least in some form, to hold through 2018.

“U.S producers should rest easy that OPEC is not going to bomb the market. OPEC has accepted shale as part of the energy mix, and they need the price to be where it is too badly to affect the market in a negative way deliberately.”

Rather, OPEC sees this as a long game, he said, where shale production tapers over time while demand marches higher, “then they can unwind the cuts when there will be a need for conventional barrels from OPEC and its allies.”

2018 therefore looks good to go. Price-wise, that is.