Golunov Sergei
Энергетические рычаги внешней политики // Международные процессы. 2021. Т. 19, № 1 (64). С. 56-73. DOI 10.17994/IT.2021.19.1.64.3.
Publication Type:
Rubric:


ISSN 1728-2756

DOI 10.17994/IT.2021.19.1.64.3

While employing their energy potentials for advancing their foreign policy interests, Russia and the USA apply various political tools and practices, that can be classified as “positive”, “negative”, regulating energy markets, and reinforcing one’s own potential. The author argues that in both cases the application of energy-related statecraft is largely related either to energy security or to advancing ideologically inspired political interests. These two kinds of incentives can both work together or conflict each other. To pursue their relevant interests, both Russia and the USA have distinctive potentials, resources, and instruments that to a large extent were developed under influence of geopolitical and economic shocks: dramatic growth of global oil prices in 1970s for the USA and centrifugal post-Soviet geopolitical processes in 1990s for Russia. As a negative tool, the USA most often uses various kinds of sanctions to target energy sectors of their opponents, while the strongest Russian weapon is energy supply restrictions. To safeguard one’s own energy security and solidify their political influences both states manage bilateral complementary “producer-consumer” relations, while to stabilize global oil price, both states participate in international energy alliances. For instrumental purposes, both states also take advantage of purposeful or spontaneous transformations of their energy sectors (e.g. consolidation of the Russian energy sector and the U.S. ‘shale revolution’) for foreign policy purposes. In most cases, the effectiveness of applying statecraft tools for advancing energy-related interests proved to be limited. Those sanctions and other ways of pressure that targeted opponents’ energy sectors (especially if applied unilaterally) themselves rarely led to desirable alterations in those opponents’ policies. The results of energy alliances building also have proved to be limited both for Russia and for the USA as those alliances do not secure full-fledged control over global oil prices and are not solid or representative enough.


Keywords: statecraft | foreign policy tools | energy security | pipeline politics | Russia | USA |

Russian Science Citation Index



OTHER PUBLICATIONS ON THIS TOPIC

Klinova Marina
The state and energy security in the world and Europe as a public good // Voprosi Ekonomiki. 2022; 6: 110-125. (in Russ.). DOI 10.32609/0042-8736-2022-6-110-125.

Grigoryan H.
Specific Features of Competition in the Southeast Asian Energy Markets in the Context of the China-USA Con-frontation. Yugo-Vostochnaya Aziya: aktual'nyye problemy razvitiya, 2025, T. 2, № 2 (67). Pp. 29–42.

Makarevich Gleb
Энергетическая безопасность как один из ключевых факторов внешней политики Пакистана // Азия и Африка сегодня. 2022. № 10. С. 73-80. DOI 10.31857/S032150750020217-0.

Энергетическая безопасность глобализирующегося мира и Россия. Под ред. Симония Н.А., Жукова С.В. М., ИМЭМО РАН, 2008, 354 с.

Vernigora Alina
Strategic Planning as a Public Administration Tool: a Case of Turkey

Energy Security: National, Regional and Global Aspects. Ed. by Yu. Kvashnin, K. Voda. Moscow, IMEMO RAN, 2013, 121 p.

Rustamova Leili
Возможности и ограничения Турции как посредника в российско-украинских переговорах // Право и управление. XXI век. 2022. Т. 18, № 3 (64). С. 10-18. DOI 10.24833/2073-8420-2022-3-64-10-18.

Dmitriev Sergey
United States: the claim for world leadership in hydrocarbon energy

Sergeev Pavel
Третий энергетический пакет газообеспечения Европейского Союза / П.А. Сергеев // Национальные интересы: приоритеты и безопасность. – 2012. – № 37. – С. 52–60.

Экономические аспекты энергетического сотрудничества России с другими странами и безопасность. Авторский коллектив: Симония Н.А. (научный руководитель), Варнавский В.Г., Жуков С.В., Попов В.В., Пусенкова Н.Н., Томберг И.Р. М., ИМЭМО РАН, 2006, 129 с.

Chugrov Sergey , Oznobishchev S.
Russia and Japan. Part II. View from Russia

Kondrat’ev Vladimir
Mining Industry in Chile

Varnavskii Vladimir
Private and public partnership in the industry of Russia

Klinova Marina
Public enterprise in the European Community countries. Economic role and development trends. Moscow: Nauka, 1988. – 184 p.

The Current Energy Crisis: Economic, Technological and Environmental Risks / Zhukov S.V., ed. – Moscow, IMEMO, 2022. – 148 p.

Ovcharuk Alexander
New Study of the Global Fuel and Energy Complex - a Textbook Case for the Energy Issue

Simoniya Nodari
European Union’s energy security and Russia.

Pantin Vladimir , Lapkin Vladimir
State-Building in The Republic of Belarus: The Role of Social Cleavages and Political Divides. — South-Russian Journal of Social Sciences. 2022. Vol. 23. No. 2. Pp. 6-17.

Kondrat’ev Vladimir
Корпоративное управление после кризиса / В.Б. Кондратьев // Прямые инвестиции. – 2011. – № 4. – С. 22–26.

Gracheva Mariya
Управление рисками в государственных ведомствах и опыт Германии / М.В. Грачева // Финансы. – 2012. – № 1. – С. 66–72.
Related publications


Comments (0)

No comments

Add comment







First news
Institute News
07/08/2026

The next issue of the MEMO Journal (No. 8, 2026) is published. Much attention in the issue is paid to topical issues of the global economy. Articles are published on the state and prospects of global tax reform; on the strategic foresight of TNCs in the context of global uncertainty; on some features of economic sanctions regimes.

more...

05/08/2026

On August 5, 2026, an Off-Site Session of the International Scientific and Expert Forum "Primakov Readings" was held in the Republic of Kyrgyzstan. The topic of the session was "Development of Central Asia in the Context of Global Instability: Risks and Opportunities". The off-site session was held on the sidelines of the VIII Kyrgyz-Russian Economic Forum at the Recreation center “Baytur Resort & SPA” on Lake Issyk-Kul.

more...

Recently Published