The Power Dynamics Inherent in Global Energy Supplies

We live in a world whose underlying assumptions are guided by conflict, leverage, and alliance-making. While the products of liberal and pacifist theories of international relations have done much good in the world, the realist core of how the world works has not been challenged. It really is a dog-eat-dog world, as many might say. The distribution of resources around the world is something that can hardly be described as being equal, and that is simply part of the diversity of nature that we have to accept. Certain resources are concentrated more in other parts of the world, while certain states will need those resources more than others. One can start to see how this leads to leverage.

If sovereignty is the idea that individual states should be in complete control of their own affairs and governance, then energy sovereignty is the idea that those states should be in complete control of their own energy supply chain. The concept is different from energy security by virtue of the very concept of sovereignty being attached to it. Energy security is something that can still be ensured through dependence, if ironclad agreements are attached to it. The defining feature of energy security is the insurance of constant energy supplies at a rate that does not break the bank, so to speak.

A constant stream of energy is critical for maintaining essential economic and life-supporting functions in the modern world, as it has been since the 19th century. For states that had entered the First Industrial Revolution during that period of time, it became evident quickly that the wheels of their respective economies could not turn without coal. The British Royal Navy’s shift to steam power required coal, lots of it, and it had to be done through the consolidation of control over global focal points for coal resources.

More than that, however, the technological switch to coal benefitted the Royal Navy’s initial aspirations to dominate global trade and project its military power in the first place. This was possible through the United Kingdom’s own vast coal mines, giving rise to an industry that employed much of its working class. Domestic coal production figures reached an estimated 70-72 million tons in the mid 1800s before reaching an absolute peak of 290 million tons in 1913. This peak coincided with the peak power projection strength of the United Kingdom just prior to World War I. Yet another coincidence also occurred at that time, as all military naval equipment was being slowly shifted to oil during this time due to yet another technological shift. Until that point, all of the United Kingdom’s rivals struggled to match its naval might, and the drive towards it had become key for the infamous ‘Scramble for Africa’ period. French and German efforts to establish colonies across the continent of Africa had coal as a key strategic consideration.

Image: Coal mining sites in the United Kingdom

In more modern times, oil and gas have fully replaced coal as the cornerstone energy source driving global power games. Technological advancements bringing global energy supply chains away from a framework dominated by coal to one dominated by oil and gas have given rise to new powers. The United States, Russia, Norway, Iran, and the Gulf Cooperation Council members, particularly Saudi Arabia, are those whose words hold extreme weight on the global stage. Saudi Arabia, in particular, maintains leverage over the global economy through the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC). The powers granted compound to a serious degree of influence and control over the world’s energy supplies.

Of course, by virtue of its mutually beneficial alliance with the Gulf Arab states, the United States was able to secure primacy for its ever-growing fleet of advanced naval and aerial equipment, allowing it to project power anywhere in the world at a pace that the previous British Empire could only dream of. Recent technological advancements allow the United States to extract fuel from ‘shale’ oil deposits encased in rock formations. The largest reserves of shale oil in the world are located in the southwestern region of the United States, securing its dominance for many years ahead. Its rival, the Soviet Union, held a decisive edge due to its own reserves of liquid oil, allowing it to maintain its own sphere of influence via the Comintern and Warsaw Pact. The same oil reserves allow its successor, the Russian Federation, to exert itself in Ukraine, Belarus, and Central Asia.

Herein lies the underlying truth; the game is rigged in favor of those with the power and the resources. A grim vindication of both the realist perspective in international relations and environmental determinism. Bangladesh, by virtue of the reality of its existence and its geographical location, is deeply vulnerable to global dynamics surrounding oil and gas. By some estimates, around 80% of the energy it consumes must be imported from the Middle East. The country’s own oil and gas reserves, which are generally concentrated in the Sylhet region, are miniscule. Even projected offshore numbers from the Bay of Bengal, which are yet to be explored, remain very low. What Bangladesh and many states similar to it have, however, is great potential for renewable energy production. Solar, wind, and biomass energy production all certainly come to mind.

Renewables strengthen energy sovereignty primarily by eliminating exposure to fuel import vulnerability. Fossil fuel–based systems require continuous imports, steady foreign currency outflows, and reliance on maritime transport routes that can be disrupted by war, sanctions, or geopolitical tensions. Historical episodes come to mind, such as the oil embargo imposed by OPEC in response to US support for Israel during the 1973 Yom Kippur War. Arab OPEC members held the global economy hostage to back up Egypt and Syria, both of whom had launched a surprise offensive against Israel, and began faltering! In more recent times, the gas supply disruptions following the Russian invasion of Ukraine demonstrate how energy trade can be weaponized. It effectively negated the European Union’s efforts to aid in Ukraine’s defense, and the entire affair raised serious questions about their ability to provide meaningful support to allies. Further trouble was seen with Russian gas supplies to the EU, as sabotage against the Nord Stream 2 pipeline in late 2022 would result in much environmental damage and great consumer costs.

Image: Swedish Coast Guard camera view of surface water splashing and gas discharge following the subsea detonation of the Nord Stream 2 pipeline

Renewable systems, once installed, do not require imported fuel, significantly reducing exposure to external political leverage and stabilizing foreign exchange pressures. The aforementioned examples also show that fossil fuel prices fluctuate according to global supply-demand dynamics, geopolitical crises, and supply cartel decisions, creating fiscal stress for governments that must shield consumers from volatility. At the time of writing, a report by Bloomberg has painted a stark picture of Bangladesh’s energy situation due to Operation Epic Fury. There cannot be a better example of how vulnerable Bangladesh is to such volatility. Renewable energy, by contrast, is capital-intensive upfront but has near-zero marginal fuel costs after installation. This cost structure enables long-term price predictability, reduces subsidy burdens, and allows for more stable macroeconomic planning. Greater predictability strengthens a state’s ability to manage its economy independently, and then renewables further enhance sovereignty through diversification and resilience.

A well-designed renewable system integrates multiple sources and systems such as solar, wind, hydro, and storage, reducing reliance on any single supply channel. Following the reduction of Russian gas imports, the European Union accelerated renewable deployment to diversify its energy base and mitigate supply risk. Although now in 2026, those efforts are further complicated by ongoing supply disruptions due to warfare in the Middle East, and that only reinforces the point. Diversification limits the strategic leverage of any one supplier and increases systemic resilience against disruptions, whether geopolitical or climatic.

Source: IDCOL’s solar farm project in Bangladesh

Finally, renewables reduce exposure to maritime chokepoints and global transport risks. Oil and liquefied natural gas must pass through vulnerable sea lanes such as the Strait of Hormuz or the Suez Canal, where blockades, conflict, or piracy can interrupt supply. Renewable energy systems generate electricity domestically and continuously, bypassing these geopolitical bottlenecks altogether. For import-dependent countries, expanding renewables diminishes reliance on fragile global shipping networks and enhances long-term strategic autonomy. These are all rather good reasons to craft policy directions towards the expansion of renewables.

The Oriental Republic of Uruguay, located in South America, is a shining example of this concept at work. By late 2025, Uruguay had achieved more than a 90% share of renewables in its production of electricity. It has been the result of a long-term well structure policy initiated in 2008 that sought to utilize the country’s environmental advantages for a gradual break away from reliance on imported fossil fuel. Wind energy has been a key pillar of this transition, along with hydropower, making use of the flow of the Rionegro and Uruguay rivers. Cross-border electricity grid connections with friendly states such as Brazil and Argentina were also strengthened, allowing excess production to be sold off when necessary. While state utility services played a massive role in ensuring the success of the scheme, it could not be done without adequate public-private cooperation and creating the conditions for foreign direct investment in multiple projects since 2008.

However, not all that glitters may be gold, as one good look at the statistics will show that much of the cutting-edge advancement in renewable energy is ultimately being driven by the centers of global power, including China. The best lithium-ion battery technology already relies heavily on lithium quarries located in the Democratic Republic of Congo and Bolivia, and neither country has been free of meddling by foreign powers. Congo, in particular, has been subject to covert military action by its much more powerful neighbor, Rwanda. This is without mentioning the vast environmental damage typically caused by lithium mining. The gradual expansion of lithium use for energy may bring the world face to face with a global supply chain dependent on exporters of lithium and those that are able to process it for battery production.

In the middle of it all however, states that are blessed by geography may achieve a degree of energy sovereignty, much like Uruguay. But there will never be a silver-bullet solution.

Bio: Fatin Anwar is an Associate Analyst at Bangladesh Defence Journal and a graduate of geography. Responsible for in-depth research and analysis of geopolitics and warfare with open source intelligence techniques and scholarly research.