Washington, D.C. — Recent remarks by US President Donald Trump on Iran have reignited longstanding debates over the role of energy in American foreign policy, prompting experts to describe oil as a central pillar of US global strategy and geopolitical influence. Speaking during a White House Easter event, Trump openly declared, “If it were up to me, I’d take the oil, I’d keep the oil. I would make plenty of money,” referencing Iran.
The president also issued threats to “blow everything up,” including Iranian bridges and power plants, if Tehran failed to comply with a deadline to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, a key global oil transit chokepoint through which approximately 20% of the world’s oil normally flows.
These statements have revived scrutiny of the concept of oil imperialism—the idea that Western powers, particularly the US, have historically used military and political leverage to secure access to strategic energy resources.
Scholarly Perspective on Energy-Driven Policy
Professor Ilan Kapoor, a specialist in critical development studies at York University, Toronto, told Anadolu that Trump’s comments are consistent with a long-standing US foreign policy approach in which control of energy resources shapes global strategy. “Today’s tensions continue that legacy, with Iran positioned as both a geopolitical challenger and a key node in global energy circulation,” Kapoor said.
Recent US military operations appear to reinforce this view. On March 13, US strikes on Kharg Island, a critical Iranian port, targeted over 90 military sites but deliberately avoided major oil infrastructure. Kapoor noted, “The Kharg Island episode shows that even in conflict, Iran’s oil infrastructure is treated as systemically important. Iran embodies the contradiction of oil imperialism: a target of coercion, yet indispensable to the global energy order.”
Bulent Gokay, professor of international relations at Keele University, added that oil has historically been central to US global hegemony. “The oil dimension in US foreign policy is strategic, primarily concerning the exercise of global power,” Gokay said.
Although fracking has enabled the US to become the world’s top crude producer over the past decade, decreasing reliance on imports, Washington remains deeply invested in the stability and control of global energy flows. Key allies and rivals—including Japan, China, and Western European nations—still depend heavily on Middle Eastern oil, reinforcing the US interest in maintaining influence in the region.
Strategic Importance of Iran and the Middle East
According to Kapoor, US influence in the Middle East has historically focused less on territorial control and more on managing energy flows. “Alliances with Gulf states are closely tied to ensuring stable production and transit. Military strategy is oriented toward protecting energy flows rather than conventional territorial warfare,” he said.
Iran, which resists US dominance, remains a critical player in global energy markets, holding about 12% of the world’s proven oil reserves. Gokay added, “While the US does not need Iran’s oil for itself, it remains a missing piece in controlling the global supply. Destabilizing or gaining leverage over Iran allows the US to exert greater pressure on Russia and confront China, long-term geopolitical objectives of multiple administrations.”
Trump’s Recent Energy Actions
Since returning to office in 2025, Trump has made energy a recurrent theme in foreign policy rhetoric, emphasizing control over oil-rich regions. Following the capture of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro in early 2026, the US expanded involvement in Venezuela’s oil sector, including seizing tankers and enforcing a naval blockade. Trump also claimed via social media that Venezuelan authorities would deliver up to 50 million barrels of oil to the US, “sold at market price, and that money will be controlled by me,” underscoring his transactional approach to energy resources.
In addition, US military operations under Trump have extended to Iraq and Nigeria, further reflecting the link between strategic energy interests and military deployments. Gokay noted, “While US military actions are not solely focused on oil, it remains a prominent and unavoidable theme in these interventions.”
However, some analysts caution that direct seizure of oil resources may not serve US interests. Evan Cooper, research analyst at the Stimson Center, argued, “There is no real strategy to taking oil reserves in the Middle East, although it may now be a goal that Trump has. The US benefits more from Middle Eastern oil being efficiently sold into the global market than from directly controlling production.”
Historical Context of US Oil-Driven Interventions
The relationship between US military intervention and oil in the Middle East is longstanding. Following World War II, US companies expanded control over Middle Eastern oil, from roughly 10% in 1940 to over 60% by 1967. A notable historical example was the 1953 coup in Iran, backed by the US and UK, which overthrew Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh after he nationalized the Iranian oil industry.
Gokay explained that strategic reasoning was couched in anti-communist terms, but Iran’s vast oil reserves represented an equally crucial economic and geopolitical prize. During subsequent decades, including the Iran-Iraq War and the 1991 Gulf War, US military interventions were closely linked to protecting regional energy flows. Post-2003 Iraq also saw US policy aimed at stabilizing and restructuring the country’s oil sector.
The Carter Doctrine of 1980 formally enshrined the principle that the US would use military force to protect Gulf oil interests. Kapoor noted that this strategic imperative persists today: “Protecting energy routes and infrastructure has justified a sustained US military presence in the region for over 40 years. Middle Eastern oil remains a central pillar of US global power.”
Oil and Geopolitical Continuity
Gokay concluded, “The significance of the oil-rich Middle East for the US global position remains a central pillar of world politics. It ensures, through the use of force if necessary, that Middle Eastern oil remains accessible, free-flowing, cheap, and under US influence.”
Kapoor added that current tensions with Iran are emblematic of this enduring paradigm. While the US has diversified its energy production domestically, control over global oil routes and reserves continues to shape foreign policy, regional interventions, and military strategy.
In short, experts assert that energy remains both a strategic asset and a geopolitical lever, explaining the persistent US focus on Middle Eastern conflicts, even decades after the Carter Doctrine first formalized oil’s centrality to American power.
