• 3 minutes e-car sales collapse
  • 6 minutes America Is Exceptional in Its Political Divide
  • 11 minutes Perovskites, a ‘dirt cheap’ alternative to silicon, just got a lot more efficient
  • 2 days How Far Have We Really Gotten With Alternative Energy
  • 11 hours The United States produced more crude oil than any nation, at any time.
  • 4 days Bad news for e-cars keeps coming
  • 4 mins Oil Stocks, Market Direction, Bitcoin, Minerals, Gold, Silver - Technical Trading <--- Chris Vermeulen & Gareth Soloway weigh in
Tim Daiss

Tim Daiss

I'm an oil markets analyst, journalist and author that has been working out of the Asia-Pacific region for 12 years. I’ve covered oil, energy markets…

More Info

Premium Content

Is China Turning Trump's Oil Weapon Against Him?

Trump Xi

Usually when referring to the so-called oil weapon, analysts are talking about the decades old policy of major oil producing nations withholding production to tighten supplies and drive prices up, often driven by geopolitical motivations.

The most nefarious example of this came in 1973 when middle eastern producers, led by Saudi Arabia, cut oil imports to the U.S. and a number of Western countries. Two other embargoes took place in both 1956 and 1967 with less than stellar results. Their objective, especially in 1967 and 1973, was to force countries that supported Israel to change their foreign policies and to also put pressure on Israel to withdraw from the territories it occupied during the 1967 Arab-Israeli War, often called the Six Day War.

What appears to have faded from public memory is that the U.S. has used the oil weapon more than OPEC producers, including oil embargoes on Japan before World War II; then on the Soviet Union in the 1960s; and in various forms on South Africa, Burma, Serbia, Haiti, Libya, Iraq, Iran, and Sudan over the last twenty years or so.

However, oil embargoes, including the most remembered and politically and economically explosive embargo of 1973, seldom work. After the 1973 embargo, the U.S, Japan and several European nations that had suffered then record high oil and gasoline prices and a supply shock fought back, enacting fuel efficiency standards, the establishment of strategic petroleum reserves, and other measures that swung marginal power back to oil importing nations but more importantly reduced global oil demand for decades, in essence causing the embargo to backfire.

Oil weapon possibility?

Now, a take-off of this decades-old strategy - but this time by an oil consumer that could be trimming imports for political reasons - might be unfolding.

Last week, citing people familiar with the matter, Reuters said that Chinese state-run oil major Sinopec, the country’s top refiner, was going to cut its Iranian oil imports by half this month after coming under intense pressure from Washington to comply with the U.S. ban on Iranian oil, which kicks in on November 4.

The sources didn’t specify volumes but based on the prevailing supply contract between Sinopec and the National Iranian Oil Company (NIOC), Sinopec will reduce its loadings to about 130,000 barrels per day (bpd), equaling 20 percent of China’s daily average imports from Iran in 2017 - the deepest Chinese cut in Iranian oil exports in years. Related: Europe Prepares For Natural Gas Price Hike

While most analysts, including the Reuters report, claim that Beijing is ceding to U.S. pressure over Iranian oil imports, another motive may be lurking in the background.

As China trims its Iranian crude imports, it will have a knock-on effect of exacerbating the prevailing supply worry for global oil markets, as well as the distinct possibility of a supply crunch going forward.

Moreover, as more Iranian barrels are removed, upward pressure on global oil prices will persist, with the likelihood that the global oil price bench mark, London traded Brent crude, will breach the $90/barrel price point before the end of year. Some analysts are calling for prices around $100 per barrel, but it’s still too early to see if that will transpire.

With Beijing locked in a bitter trade war with Washington that is already hurting economic growth, and with the knowledge that high oil and gasoline prices will sway voters in the upcoming mid-term Congressional elections, Beijing could be playing the oil card so Republicans lose their slim two seat lead in the Senate.

Without a majority in the Senate, much of Trump’s policies thus far, including his hawkish view with China over trade as well as other issues will be in jeopardy. The Senate is currently composed of 51 Republicans, 47 Democrats, and 2 independents, both of whom caucus with the Democrats Related: The Middle East Nuclear Race Is Reaching A Boiling Point

From Beijing’s perspective, any set back to Trump’s trade war would be a win both abroad and at home. However, if the Republican party retains control of the Senate, it’s likely that Trump will impose tariffs on all remaining Chinese imports to the U.S., leaving Beijing exposed both economically and geopolitically.

Trump’s accusations

The White House has already claimed that China is trying to influence American voters by leveling sanctions against industries and states that support his candidacy. 


Last week, during his much criticized speech to the UN, Trump upped the ante even more, stating that China did not want “me or us [the Republican party] to win, because I am the first president ever to challenge China on trade.”

“And we are winning on trade. We are winning on every level,” he added.

By Tim Daiss for Oilprice.com

More Top Reads From Oilprice.com:

Download The Free Oilprice App Today

Back to homepage

Leave a comment
  • Aghast on October 02 2018 said:
    The Democrats have been working with the Chinese to undermine the United States for decades.
  • Mitch on October 02 2018 said:
    This had crossed my mind, but with Iran withholding exports to bring pain for those same reasons.

    But an easy counter to high prices right now would be to issue various volumes of 3 and 6 month waviers to the US allies who have appeared ready to comply. Iran is certainly filling ships and would be willing to sell.
  • Maria z on October 02 2018 said:
    Aghast -100% correct. Hollywood, a wing of the democrat party already includes obvious Chinese propaganda in its films too. This is just one more angle, and why wouldn’t they do this, it’s something I’d considered before this article, if they can jack up inflation they figure they can get their guys in.
  • greedy american have no oil and using china for mutual rewards on October 03 2018 said:
    american leaders/ceo's/wealthy are the only ones really benefiting from cheap oil so also china. rest of america/china may save but these upper echelons dudes/thieves are making money fomr cheap oill. but they are staging a pussy war between them as if the world will be scared that china is bad and USA is good. both are greedy. so they have enough of immoral executives who will do anything to keep oil prices low.
    last 15 years china has created 1 million chinese millionaires, which means there about 20 milion chinese who have benefited( including dependdnts, fmaily and their bankers.)

    These rich upstart fkcers /millionare with other peopls money, are buying property everywhere -zurich to vancover. most of these rich chinese are politicla allies of top government officials.
    another country that benefits from cheap oil/minerals is India. so they are colluding in ths fraud.

    We must stop this.
    i am indian but i am rare case of hard working and so also a loser.
  • Zhuubaajie on October 03 2018 said:
    China is the world's biggest energy importer. Why would there be an incentive to jerk up oil prices?

    But I do think that while the cutback of Iranian oil imports by China's oil majors is to avoid American sanctions, there is no intention for China to cut back as a country. The imports would just be shifted to smaller independents, ones that are not subject to American influence.
  • Jean Peckham Kavale on October 04 2018 said:
    After receiving a promotion to brigadier general in 1942, my father went to Washington, DC, where he directed the U.S. Army Fuels and Lubricants Division. During those years, he served concurrently on the Army-Navy Petroleum Board (ANPB) and occasionally testified before Congress, including the august Truman Committee, about the military need for oil and the urgency of pipeline construction.

    For meritoriously procuring fuels and lubricants and then allocating them to the military forces of the United States during the period October 1943 to September 1945, he was awarded a Distinguished Service Medal.

    One image in the biography I wrote about my father (A Salute to Patriotism: The Life and Work of Major General Howard L. Peckham, on Amazon) spotlights the behind-the-scenes efforts of his division. It shows military vehicles arriving on boats and rolling onto shore the day after D-Day. As noted in a book by Erna Risch (Fuels for Global Conflict), before any vehicle was transported to Omaha and Utah Beaches, it was filled with a full tank of gasoline and carried an extra supply of gas in five-gallon cans. For that foresightedness, and for other expert planning, America can thank the U.S. Army Fuels and Lubricants Division. There is no doubt that its diligence greatly aided the Allied victory in WWII.

Leave a comment

EXXON Mobil -0.35
Open57.81 Trading Vol.6.96M Previous Vol.241.7B
BUY 57.15
Sell 57.00
Oilprice - The No. 1 Source for Oil & Energy News