/industry-wired/media/agency_attachments/2024/12/04/2024-12-04t130344212z-iw-new.png)
/industry-wired/media/agency_attachments/2024/12/04/2024-12-04t130332454z-iw-new.jpg)
/industry-wired/media/media_files/2026/02/04/why-the-us-wants-a-stronghold-on-oil-rich-nations-2026-02-04-10-33-59.jpg)
Why the United States Protects Oil Routes That Move Over 20% of Global Supply
For more than half a century, the United States has maintained deep political, military, and economic involvement in oil-rich regions, particularly the Middle East. This involvement has often been portrayed as a quest for cheap oil or direct control over resources.
The core objective is not ownership of oil, but control over energy flows, pricing stability, and geopolitical leverage in a global economy.
Despite the US becoming the world’s largest producer of oil and natural gas, its strategic interest in oil-rich nations has not declined.
Oil is a global market, not a bilateral trade
Crude oil is priced globally, primarily through benchmarks like Brent and WTI. A supply disruption anywhere, whether in the Middle East, Russia, or West Africa, affects prices everywhere.
According to the US Energy Information Administration (EIA):
- Global oil consumption averaged around 102 million barrels per day (mb/d) in 2024
- Price spikes of even $10 per barrel can add 0.3-0.5 percentage points to headline inflation in major economies
This means the US economy remains exposed to external oil shocks even when domestic production is high. Higher oil prices raise:
- Fuel and transportation costs
- Food prices (fertilizers, logistics)
- Manufacturing input costs
- Interest rates via inflation expectations
In short, energy insecurity translates directly into macroeconomic instability, regardless of import dependence.
Strategic chokepoints matter more than production volumes
One of the most important reasons the US focuses on oil-rich regions is geography, not reserves.
The Strait of Hormuz
- Carries 20-21 mb/d of oil
- Represents 20% of global petroleum liquids consumption
- Handles over 30% of the global seaborne oil trade
There is no viable short-term substitute for Hormuz. Existing bypass pipelines in Saudi Arabia and the UAE can reroute only 25-30% of normal flows.
A full closure, even briefly, would likely push oil prices above $150 per barrel, according to multiple stress-scenario estimates by energy analysts and policy institutions.
https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/
The Carter Doctrine institutionalized oil security as national security
In 1980, following the Iranian Revolution and the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, the US formally declared Persian Gulf security a vital national interest.
The Carter Doctrine stated that any attempt by an external power to control the Gulf region would be regarded as an assault on US interests and repelled by force if necessary.
This doctrine:
- Justified permanent US military presence in the region
- Shaped arms sales and security partnerships
- Embedded oil security into US defense planning
- Although rarely cited today, its logic still underpins US force posture and alliance structures in the Middle East.
https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1977-80v18/
Energy leverage is geopolitical power
Control over oil supply is not only about economics, but it is also about influence.
Oil-rich nations' influence:
- Global price stability
- Balance of payments for importers
- Fiscal health of emerging economies
- Political stability in fragile states
A rival power dominating oil hubs could:
- Pressure oil-dependent allies (Japan, South Korea, India, EU)
- Manipulate supply during crises
- Convert energy dependence into diplomatic leverage
Oil security underpins the US-led financial system
Oil trade is tightly linked to global finance:
- Crude is priced in US dollars
- Oil exporters recycle surplus revenues into dollar-denominated assets
- Energy trade supports dollar liquidity and US Treasury demand
While the “petrodollar” is often overstated, energy markets still reinforce the dollar’s role as the world’s primary reserve and settlement currency.
A major shift in oil trade away from dollar pricing, combined with supply manipulation, could weaken:
- US borrowing advantages
- Global financial stability
- Sanctions enforcement capacity
Maintaining influence in oil-producing regions indirectly supports monetary and financial power, not just energy security.
Why the US stayed involved even after becoming energy-independent
By 2018, the US became a net exporter of petroleum liquids. Yet its Middle East footprint remained.
Why? Because US allies remain heavily dependent:
- Japan imports 90% of its oil from the Middle East
- South Korea imports 70%
- India imports 60%
- Europe relies on Middle Eastern supply to offset Russian volatility
If US allies face energy crises, the geopolitical cost eventually reaches Washington through financial contagion, alliance strain, and security commitments.
Thus, US strategy reflects systemic responsibility, not narrow self-sufficiency.
Military presence lowers risk premiums even when unused
Markets price risk based on expectations, not just outcomes.
The visible US security umbrella:
- Reduces perceived probability of prolonged disruptions
- Lowers insurance and shipping costs
- Dampens speculative price spikes
Even when US forces are not actively engaged, their presence stabilizes expectations. This “insurance effect” is rarely visible, but economically significant.
The costs and contradictions of the strategy
Critics argue the US pays a disproportionate price for global oil security:
- Trillions spent on Middle East wars and deployments
- Political backlash and regional resentment
- Indirect benefits accrue to rivals and competitors
There is also evidence that security guarantees can encourage risky behavior by regional partners, increasing instability rather than reducing it.
These contradictions fuel ongoing debates in US policy circles about burden-sharing, offshore balancing, and gradual disengagement.
Energy transition is changing but not eliminating the equation
Renewables, EVs, and electrification are reducing oil’s share of long-term energy growth. However:
- Oil still dominates transportation and petrochemicals
- aviation, shipping, and heavy industry remain oil-linked
- Demand is expected to persist well into the 2030s
This means oil-rich regions will remain geopolitically relevant even in a decarbonizing world. The likely future is managed decline, not abrupt irrelevance.
Conclusion
The US does not seek a stronghold on oil-rich nations to “take oil.” It seeks to manage a global system where oil flows underpin economic stability, alliance cohesion, and geopolitical balance.
By securing chokepoints, preventing rival dominance, stabilizing markets, and protecting allied access, the US treats energy as strategic infrastructure similar to sea lanes, financial systems, or communications networks.
As long as oil remains central to the global economy, influence over oil-rich regions will remain a core pillar of US power.