A crude bargain: Great powers, oil states, and petro-alignment
Petro-alignment, a quid pro quo arrangement whereby great powers offer security in exchange for oil states’ friendly oil policies, is a widely used and yet undertheorized energy security strategy. One consequential aspect of this exchange is that great powers choose different levels of security comm...
Saved in:
Main Author: | |
---|---|
Format: | text |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University
2019
|
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/soss_research/2963 https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/context/soss_research/article/4220/viewcontent/101080_0963641220191662478.pdf |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Institution: | Singapore Management University |
Language: | English |
id |
sg-smu-ink.soss_research-4220 |
---|---|
record_format |
dspace |
spelling |
sg-smu-ink.soss_research-42202021-11-16T06:32:28Z A crude bargain: Great powers, oil states, and petro-alignment KIM, Inwook Petro-alignment, a quid pro quo arrangement whereby great powers offer security in exchange for oil states’ friendly oil policies, is a widely used and yet undertheorized energy security strategy. One consequential aspect of this exchange is that great powers choose different levels of security commitment to keep oil producers friendly. With what criteria do great powers rank oil states? How do we conceptualize different types of petro-alignments? What exactly do great powers and oil producers exchange under each petro-alignment type? I posit that a mix of market power and geostrategic location determines the strategic value and vulnerability of individual client oil states, which then generates four corresponding types of petro-alignment—security guarantee, strategic alignment, strategic favor, and neglect. Two carefully selected case comparisons—Saudi Arabia and Kuwait in 1970–91, and Azerbaijan and Ecuador in 1990–2013—show how great powers created, utilized, and maintained petro-alignments under the unique logic of oil markets and across varying geopolitical settings. The findings have important implications on great powers’ grand strategies, strategic behaviors of oil states, and the role of oil in international security. 2019-09-01T07:00:00Z text application/pdf https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/soss_research/2963 info:doi/10.1080/09636412.2019.1662478 https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/context/soss_research/article/4220/viewcontent/101080_0963641220191662478.pdf http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ Research Collection School of Social Sciences eng Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University oil petro-alignment oil market geopolitics asymmetric alliance grand strategy energy security Saudi Arabia US foreign policy Oil, Gas, and Mineral Law Political Science |
institution |
Singapore Management University |
building |
SMU Libraries |
continent |
Asia |
country |
Singapore Singapore |
content_provider |
SMU Libraries |
collection |
InK@SMU |
language |
English |
topic |
oil petro-alignment oil market geopolitics asymmetric alliance grand strategy energy security Saudi Arabia US foreign policy Oil, Gas, and Mineral Law Political Science |
spellingShingle |
oil petro-alignment oil market geopolitics asymmetric alliance grand strategy energy security Saudi Arabia US foreign policy Oil, Gas, and Mineral Law Political Science KIM, Inwook A crude bargain: Great powers, oil states, and petro-alignment |
description |
Petro-alignment, a quid pro quo arrangement whereby great powers offer security in exchange for oil states’ friendly oil policies, is a widely used and yet undertheorized energy security strategy. One consequential aspect of this exchange is that great powers choose different levels of security commitment to keep oil producers friendly. With what criteria do great powers rank oil states? How do we conceptualize different types of petro-alignments? What exactly do great powers and oil producers exchange under each petro-alignment type? I posit that a mix of market power and geostrategic location determines the strategic value and vulnerability of individual client oil states, which then generates four corresponding types of petro-alignment—security guarantee, strategic alignment, strategic favor, and neglect. Two carefully selected case comparisons—Saudi Arabia and Kuwait in 1970–91, and Azerbaijan and Ecuador in 1990–2013—show how great powers created, utilized, and maintained petro-alignments under the unique logic of oil markets and across varying geopolitical settings. The findings have important implications on great powers’ grand strategies, strategic behaviors of oil states, and the role of oil in international security. |
format |
text |
author |
KIM, Inwook |
author_facet |
KIM, Inwook |
author_sort |
KIM, Inwook |
title |
A crude bargain: Great powers, oil states, and petro-alignment |
title_short |
A crude bargain: Great powers, oil states, and petro-alignment |
title_full |
A crude bargain: Great powers, oil states, and petro-alignment |
title_fullStr |
A crude bargain: Great powers, oil states, and petro-alignment |
title_full_unstemmed |
A crude bargain: Great powers, oil states, and petro-alignment |
title_sort |
crude bargain: great powers, oil states, and petro-alignment |
publisher |
Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University |
publishDate |
2019 |
url |
https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/soss_research/2963 https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/context/soss_research/article/4220/viewcontent/101080_0963641220191662478.pdf |
_version_ |
1770574805633859584 |