Follow us on social

google cta
Shutterstock_1497263597-scaled

Russian oil import ban highlights urgency to act on renewables

The US can take the lead on clean energy production while at the same time reducing its reliance on authoritarians with a lot of oil.

Analysis | Middle East
google cta
google cta

On Tuesday, President Biden announced that the United States will ban the import of Russian fossil fuels. The decision preempts possible legislative action by Congress to do the same. Although only about 8 percent of U.S. fossil fuel imports come from Russia, the decision has driven fuel costs even higher. The national average price for a gallon of regular gasoline in the U.S. reached $4.17, a new record, based on anticipation of Biden’s announcement, surpassing spikes witnessed in summer 2008 prior to the financial crisis. 

Rumors circulated that Biden may travel to Saudi Arabia to ask Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MBS) to raise limits on oil production in order to lower the global cost of oil, which stood at $132 for Brent Crude on Tuesday. Although Saudi fossil fuel only accounts for about 7 percent of U.S. imports, the Saudis have spare capacity and can significantly influence the global price of fuel. However the Saudis and the other members of OPEC+, including Russia, have maintained an agreement to keep production caps in place.

Biden has thus far refused to engage with MBS, choosing instead to interact with his ailing father, King Salman, despite MBS’s position as the de facto head of state. MBS is reportedly frustrated by this perceived snub, which reflects Biden’s desire to punish the Crown Prince for his role in the murder of journalist and U.S. resident Jamal Khashoggi as well as the brutal war on Yemen. 

To be clear, the Biden administration has maintained working relations with Riyadh, including by authorizing over a billion dollars in new weapons sales to the kingdom, despite Biden’s announcement soon after taking office that he would end U.S. support for Saudi offensives against Yemen. Biden’s possible trip to Riyadh has generated critique from both the left and the right, pointing out the president’s failure to uphold his campaign pledge to make Saudi Arabia a “pariah” for the murderous policies carried out by MBS.

Biden has alternatives to increased oil production that do not require pleading with the Saudis. The administration is in talks with Venezuela about possibly and temporarily easing sanctions on the government of Nicolas Maduro in order to bring Venezuelan oil to the global market, a move that would also help pull Caracas out of Moscow’s orbit.

Reentering the Iran nuclear deal would bring Iranian oil back on the global market and lower prices. However, Putin has anticipated this and is working to impose additional conditions that may further hamstring the already lengthy negotiations.

Working with the Saudis to increase oil production represents a more familiar choice for U.S. officials, who may fear the political costs of easing sanctions on the governments in Caracas and Tehran. Yet the Democrats’ more pressing fear — losing control of Congress in the 2022 midterms and the White House in 2024 — becomes increasingly salient as American voters struggle with inflation and rising fuel costs.

Congressional Republicans have used the high price of fuel to call for increased drilling in protected American lands like the Alaskan National Wildlife Refuge. Congressional Democrats have pointed out that it would take years for the oil from new wells to come online, doing nothing to address the current price spike. As of 2020, the United States regained its former status as a net exporter of oil. Yet because the U.S. economy remains dependent on fossil fuels, even greater production of American oil would not end vulnerability to the effects of other countries’ decisions about raising or lowering production. To achieve true energy independence, the United States must transition off of fossil fuels to locally produced renewable energy sources.

Although the United States has banned the import of Russian fuels, the EU, which imports about 40 percent of its natural gas from Russia, will not follow suit. Inadequate capacity from alternative sources prevents the EU from acting as swiftly as the United States, which relies primarily on Canada for fossil fuels.

Swings in the price of oil reiterate the interdependence, and subsequent vulnerability, of the global economy. Oil prices had been low since 2014, due in part to the influx of U.S. shale oil on the global market. The price per gallon slipped below zero during the early months of the COVID pandemic, as Saudi Arabia and Russia fought a price war. Since then, Saudi Arabia has led efforts to sustain caps on production, including by pressuring the UAE not to break ranks. All oil producers, from Saudi Arabia to Texas, have incentives to keep prices high, and it is possible that even a visit from President Biden will be insufficient to convince MBS to raise production.

The Saudis and other Gulf states are increasingly hedging their bets, looking to Russia and China as rising powers, and looking to strengthen their relationships with Moscow and Beijing while seeing the United States, and Biden in particular, as a lame duck. Their calculations reflect the increasingly multipolar global order: Washington should not react by capitulating to their demands, but instead by taking steps to finally end America’s dependence on fossil fuels and reliance on the whims of rulers like MBS.


Image: crystal51 via shutterstock.com
google cta
Analysis | Middle East
United Nations
Monitors at the United Nations General Assembly hall display the results of a vote on a resolution condemning the annexation of parts of Ukraine by Russia, amid Russia's invasion of Ukraine, at the United Nations Headquarters in New York City, New York, U.S., October 12, 2022. REUTERS/David 'Dee' Delgado||

We're burying the rules based order. But what's next?

Global Crises

In a Davos speech widely praised for its intellectual rigor and willingness to confront established truths, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney finally laid the fiction of the “rules-based international order” to rest.

The “rules-based order” — or RBIO — was never a neutral description of the post-World War II system of international law and multilateral institutions. Rather, it was a discourse born out of insecurity over the West’s decline and unwillingness to share power. Aimed at preserving the power structures of the past by shaping the norms and standards of the future, the RBIO was invariably something that needed to be “defended” against those who were accused of opposing it, rather than an inclusive system that governed relations between all states.

keep readingShow less
china trump
President Donald Trump announces the creation of a critical minerals reserve during an event in the Oval Office at the White House in Washington, DC on Monday, February 2, 2026. Trump announced the creation of “Project Vault,” a rare earth stockpile to lower reliance on China for rare earths and other resources. Photo by Bonnie Cash/Pool/Sipa USA

Trump vs. his China hawks

Asia-Pacific

In the year since President Donald Trump returned to the White House, China hawks have started to panic. Leading lights on U.S. policy toward Beijing now warn that Trump is “barreling toward a bad bargain” with the Chinese Communist Party. Matthew Pottinger, a key architect of Trump’s China policy in his first term, argues that the president has put Beijing in a “sweet spot” through his “baffling” policy decisions.

Even some congressional Republicans have criticized Trump’s approach, particularly following his decision in December to allow the sale of powerful Nvidia AI chips to China. “The CCP will use these highly advanced chips to strengthen its military capabilities and totalitarian surveillance,” argued Rep. John Moolenaar (R-Mich.), who chairs the influential Select Committee on Competition with China.

keep readingShow less
Is America still considered part of the 'Americas'?
Top image credit: bluestork/shutterstock.com

Is America still considered part of the 'Americas'?

Latin America

On January 7, the White House announced its plans to withdraw from 66 international bodies whose work it had deemed inconsistent with U.S. national interests.

While many of these organizations were international in nature, three of them were specific to the Americas — the Inter-American Institute for Global Change Research, the Pan American Institute of Geography and History, and the U.N.’s Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean. The decision came on the heels of the Dominican Republic postponing the X Summit of the Americas last year following disagreements over who would be invited and ensuing boycotts.

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.