Global and regional orders and the changing geopolitics of energy

Abstract

Attention by international relations scholars to the transformation underway stemming from the rise of China has not been matched by that given to the transformation underway in the international energy system. This article looks at three dimensions of that transformation: the end of cheap oil and the rising trend of energy prices; the changing role of the traditional international oil companies and the rise of national oil companies; and the growing energy importance of the Middle East and Russia. It looks at how these changes have already affected or are likely to affect three strategic relationships: US-Middle East; US-China; and Europe-Russia-US. It concludes that more attention needs to be given by scholars to what will be major changes in global geopolitical relationships with considerable consequences for the foreign policies of the major powers.

Notes

1. Comments from Chris Reus-Smit, Pamela Harris and two anonymous reviewers have improved an earlier draft of this article.

2. The US Energy Information Administration assumed a price of US$130 a barrel for 2030 at 2007 prices in its comparable case (EIA 2009). Both institutions provide a range of projections—both higher and lower.

3. A somewhat more optimistic view, based on assumed lower decline rates (4.5% percent) and more responsive investment, is in an IHS CERA (Cambridge Energy Research Associates) report (Jackson 2009).

4. Questions have arisen about pressure being applied on the IEA (Macalister 2009).

5. These include natural gas liquids, shale oils, etc., but not biofuels.

6. ‘Seven Sisters’ was a derisive term coined in the early 1950s by Enrico Mattei, president of the Italian oil company ENI: they were Esso, Shell, BP, Gulf, Texaco, Mobil and Chevron.

7. The seven are ExxonMobil, BP, Shell, Chevron, Total, ENI and Conoco-Phillips.

8. Useful references on NOCs include Jaffe and Soligo (2007), Marcel (2006) and Pirog (2007).

9. Based on EIA (US Energy Information Administration) data.

10. In his ‘Limited Contingency Study’, discussed in Mann (2004: 79–84).

11. Japan, of course, has been almost totally dependent on imports of oil for many years.

12. Only by targeting China's three major east coast ports or terminals could significant diplomatic repercussions be avoided and such targeting would still be vulnerable to local air and missile defences.

13. One reason for US nuclear cooperation with India was to counter an Iran–Pakistan–India pipeline proposal.

14. Useful discussions of regional energy issues can be found in Harris (2009) and Wesley (2007).

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Stuart Harris

Stuart Harris is Emeritus Professor in the Department of International Relations at the Australian National University. He has researched China's foreign policy, its relationship with the USA and the region, and regional responses to globalisation, with particular emphasis on China and North-East Asia. Other areas of current research include the foreign policy elements of energy developments and of religion