Authors: M. Abiya Emima and Edberg D. Cheeran
The global oil market has long played a pivotal role in shaping contemporary geopolitics, serving as a vital instrument for sustaining political dominance and shaping international interactions. Saudi Arabia, Russia, and the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) have long been the leading exporters of crude oil, but recent developments have revealed that the United States (US) has emerged as the leading global decision-maker in the oil industry. The abrupt decline in Saudi Arabia’s oil imports, from 8.1 million bpd in 2025 to 5.9 million bpd in February 2026 after the war crisis, has driven them to their lowest level on record. Moreover, to counteract Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the US imposed sanctions on Russian oil, disrupting its exports and causing systemic turmoil in the global energy trade markets.
After a remarkable surge in crude oil and gas output from its shale formations, US exports soared from approximately 6.6 million barrels of oil per day in 2025 to over 10 million barrels of oil per day in May 2026, reinforcing the US’s unprecedented prominence in the global oil landscape. This transformation has occurred amid the US’s strategic exploitation of the Middle Eastern war and the Hormuz crisis, both of which will substantially influence global oil prices and liquefied natural gas (LNG) supply chains. A deficit of approximately 20 percent emerged in global crude oil and LNG exports due to ongoing tensions in the Strait of Hormuz, paving the way for emerging alternative exporters. Taking advantage of this situation, American oil and LNG exporters seized this opportunity by devising a lucrative plan with energy-importing nations to expand export capacity and strengthen long-term energy agreements. This move shifted the US from an oil-importing economy to a dominant energy supplier, compelling numerous countries to rely solely on its oil exports to mitigate oil supply disruptions. Additionally, the US petrochemical industry can benefit immensely by securing cheaper feedstocks than its global competitors, who are highly dependent on fuel-based energy sources, thereby securing a competitive advantage.
The primary motive behind this energy policy is to significantly improve the US’s foreign-exchange revenue, boost the trade balance, enhance investment in shale production, and create job opportunities across the energy value chain. In addition, bolstering the balance of payments through American petroleum and LNG exports has strengthened the US’s geopolitical standing relative to competitors in the oil industry. The US has also utilized sanctions as a core strategy to impose strict restrictions and regulations on nearly all Russian firms and to limit Iranian exports, wielding full authority capable of radically modifying global oil trade flows. Moreover, because international oil prices are set in US dollars, they constantly cause fluctuations in US interest rates, fiscal policy, and the nation’s economic progress. This instability indirectly influences global oil trade and the decisions surrounding capital investments, underscoring the need for careful consideration. Hence, the US’s hegemony in controlling access to financial systems and international landscapes precisely determines which oil-producing nations should be permitted to participate in the global energy trade system.
Stay ahead of the geopolitical week.
MD Briefing delivers expert analysis across five global fronts — the Indo-Pacific, energy, geoeconomics, European security, and the Middle East — every Monday morning. Free.
The deliberate undermining of OPEC has further strengthened the US’s energy position. The rapid proliferation of US shale oil has reshaped competition across the open markets of Europe and Asia, making it harder for OPEC members to exercise dominance. It has also created a formidable challenge for OPEC members, pushing them to adopt aggressive sustainability strategies to retain potential customers and offer more competitive pricing. Despite ongoing international volatility, OPEC’s constant struggle to lower market projections has created numerous internal challenges, and the constant movement of membership has considerably reduced the organization’s capacity to serve as the exclusive market stabilizer. Past OPEC behavior dated back to single-handed control over global trade prices through production-volume manipulation. However, following the current leadership transition in the global trade market, the US has adopted extreme flexibility in its supply and improved the responsiveness of US shale exporters to control price levels. As a result, any production curtailment in OPEC’s oil supply will be counterbalanced by the US’s increased output capacity, thereby limiting the effectiveness of OPEC nations’ interventions. In addition, the crude oil power transition can lead to revenue pressures on OPEC economies, as they rely heavily on petroleum revenues to finance public expenditure, economic progress, and fiscal deficits.
Hence, America’s global oil trade hegemony, achieved through war strategies,has induced several challenges for OPEC members by accelerating rivalry, tightening markets, diminishing market share, eroding pricing leverage, and reducing geopolitical control achieved through past oil export supremacy. Through regulatory sanctions, export controls, coercive diplomacy, political dominance, and international influence, the US can significantly shape global power dynamics and rival political alliances. In conclusion, excessive US dependence can lead to a fragmented global order, beginning with policy changes aligned with America’s geopolitical interests and potentially extending to hypothetical restrictions on the strategic sovereignty of exporting nations.
