A Crude Bargain: Great Powers, Oil States, and Petro-Alignment (original) (raw)
Related papers
2015
The aim of the Geopolitics of Oil is to find a theoretical conceptualization of oil trade regime evolution and its changes during the period between the end of the World War II and 2011. This thesis builds on the two major theories of international relations: neorealism and interdependence theory. The theoretical part of the paper analyzes their main contributions and weaknesses. This enables to formulate the new approach to political economy of oil with a special emphasis on geo-economics. This thesis seeks to answer two main research questions: 1) "Under which conditions do oil exporters consolidate their energy sector?" and 1) "What is the reason for engagement of foreign powers in the oil regions?" This thesis examines relations between exporters from the Persian Gulf and the United States. Interdependence theory is tested by a calculation of symmetry or asymmetry in interdependent relationship between importers and exporters, which is done by a comparison of...
We present the strategic hedging framework as a way to trace the determinants of the foreign policies of great powers. We use the case of Chinese energy security strategy in the Middle East as an illustrative case study. We first use four criteria to establish that China's energy security strategy in the Middle East is a strong example of strategic hedging behavior. Then we examine the impact of oil production in the Middle East countries on growth of Chinese economic relationships with these countries. The results of this study show clearly that oil production plays an important role in the Sino-Middle East relations. We find a positive relationship between oil productions in Middle East countries on the one hand and the distribution and growth of China's trade and investment with these countries on the other hand. These results confirm that strategic hedging behavior leads to develop China's economic relations with the oil producing countries in order to cover its grow...
Oil and Resource-Backed Aggression
Energy Policy, 2011
A common misperception about oil politics is that it has a uniform, monolithic effect on policy development. This paper argues that in fact the net political effect of oil varies dramatically depending on the nature of the petrostate. It shows that oil income, when combined with revolutionary governments in petrostates, generates strong incentives for foreign policy aggression and international conflict. The aggressiveness of petro-revolutionary states is shown to have consequences in both military and economic spheres of international relations. Militarily, the aggressiveness of this type of state leads to a high rate of armed conflicts. Economically, the aggressiveness of petro-revolutionary states shapes global oil markets and international economic relations. The argument is tested using statistical analysis of international conflicts and economic sanctions. The policy implications are then considered, focusing on the negative global impacts of dependence on oil consumption.
Shaping a new world order: The Gulf and the greater Middle East stake their claim
Gulf Monographic Series No. 5, 2019
The 21st century’s Great Game is about the creation of a new Eurasia-centred world. It locks China, the United States, Russia, India, Japan and Europe into what is an epic battle. Yet, they are not the only players. Middle Eastern rivals, Saudi Arabia and Iran, are key players too. As they vie for big power favour, they compete to secure the ability to shape the future architecture of Eurasia’s energy landscape, enhance leverage by increasing energy and oil product market share, and position themselves as the key nodes in infrastructure networks. With China, Russia, the United States, India and Japan as the heavy weights, the Great Game is unlikely to produce an undisputed winner. Nor do key players perceive it as a zero-sum-game. The stakes in the game are about divvying up the pie and ensuring that China despite its vast resources, economic leverage, and first starter advantage in infrastructure linkages, does not emerge as the sole dominant power in Eurasia’s future architecture.