Oil i​s not simp⁠ly fuel – it is power in its mos​t co‌ncent‌ra​t​e​d‍ form

The global conversation on energy has, for years, been dominated by an optimistic narrative: a world steadily transitioning away from fossil fuels toward renewables, driven by climate urgency and technological progress. Yet the unfolding geopolitical realities particularly in and around the Strait of Hormuz and the broader United States–Iran confrontation tell a far less idealistic story. Beneath the rhetoric of green transformation lies a harder truth that crude oil remains the central pillar of global power. It is not merely an economic commodity, but a strategic asset that continues to shape military planning, foreign policy, and global hierarchies. And in this contest, the behavior of major powers especially the United States reveals that the age of fossil-fueled geopolitics is far from over.

The persistence of oil as a strategic anchor is not accidental. Modern military systems from fighter jets to naval fleets remain overwhelmingly dependent on high-density fossil fuels. Industrial production, global shipping, and even food systems are deeply intertwined with oil supply chains. The strategic importance of chokepoints like the Strait of Hormuz, through which a significant share of the world’s oil passes, underscores this reality. Control over such routes translates directly into leverage over global markets and, by extension, over states that depend on uninterrupted energy flows. In this sense, oil is not simply fuel it is power in its most concentrated form.

It is within this framework that the foreign policy behavior of the United States must be understood. Over decades, from the Cold War to the present, American interventions have often occurred in regions rich in hydrocarbon resources. While these actions are frequently justified in terms of security, democracy, or stability, the underlying strategic logic consistently points toward securing access to, or influence over, energy reserves. The 1953 overthrow of Iran’s Prime Minister, Mohammad Mossadegh, following his nationalization of the oil industry, remains one of the clearest early examples. Subsequent engagements in the Middle East, including the Gulf Wars and the invasion of Iraq, have similarly unfolded within contexts where oil was a central variable.

To describe this pattern as merely strategic, however, may understate its human and political consequences. Critics argue that such interventions reflect a form of resource-driven imperialism one that prioritizes control over energy at the expense of sovereignty and, at times, civilian lives. Whether one adopts the strongest moral language or not, it is difficult to ignore the scale of disruption, instability, and suffering that has accompanied many of these conflicts. The pursuit of energy security by major powers has, in numerous instances, translated into prolonged wars, sanctions regimes, and systemic destabilization in resource-rich regions.

At the same time, the strategic competition surrounding oil has taken on a new dimension with the rise of China and the reassertion of Russia. Both countries are deeply embedded in global energy dynamics Russia as a major exporter, and China as one of the world’s largest importers. For the United States, maintaining influence over global oil markets is not only about sustaining its own economic and military dominance, but also about constraining the strategic options of these emerging or resurgent powers. Control over supply routes, pricing mechanisms, and access points becomes a means of indirect competition.

This is particularly evident in the politics of sanctions and access. By restricting certain countries’ ability to export oil or by influencing global supply chains, the United States can shape the energy landscape in ways that affect its rivals. Similarly, maintaining a strong presence in key regions such as the Persian Gulf ensures that Washington retains a degree of oversight or at least influence over competitors’ energy lifelines. In this sense, oil becomes both a resource and a geopolitical instrument, deployed in the broader contest for global influence.

Against this backdrop, the global push for renewable energy appears, at best, incomplete and, at worst, strategically selective. While significant investments have been made in solar, wind, and other renewable technologies, these efforts coexist with continued and in some cases expanded commitments to fossil fuel production and control. The discourse of energy transition, therefore, does not fully align with the realities of state behavior. Major powers continue to prioritize oil where it matters most: in strategic calculations, military planning, and geopolitical competition.

This apparent contradiction raises an important question: to what extent do genuine environmental concerns shape the renewable energy agenda, and to what extent does it serve broader strategic objectives? For developing countries, particularly those in the Global South, this question is not merely academic. Policies and pressures related to energy transition can have profound implications for development trajectories, access to resources, and economic sovereignty. If advanced economies promote renewables while consolidating control over fossil-fuel assets and supply chains, the result may be an uneven playing field one in which the Global South is encouraged to transition without being afforded the same strategic flexibility.

For countries like Bangladesh, these dynamics are especially consequential. As a rapidly growing economy with limited domestic energy resources, Bangladesh is heavily dependent on imported fuel. This dependence makes it acutely vulnerable to fluctuations in global oil prices and to disruptions in supply routes. Events in distant regions whether conflicts in the Middle East or tensions in maritime chokepoints can have immediate and tangible effects on Bangladesh’s economy, from inflationary pressures to energy shortages.

Moreover, Bangladesh operates within a broader geopolitical environment where major powers are actively competing for influence. Its strategic location in the Bay of Bengal, coupled with its economic potential, makes it an important player in regional dynamics. Navigating this environment requires a careful balancing act one that takes into account not only immediate economic needs but also longer-term strategic considerations. In an oil-dominated world, this means securing reliable energy supplies while avoiding overdependence on any single actor.

The lessons of the current global energy landscape, therefore, are both clear and sobering. First, despite the growing visibility of renewables, oil remains the cornerstone of global power. Second, the competition for control over this resource continues to shape the behavior of major powers, often prioritizing strategic advantage over ethical considerations. Third, the rhetoric of energy transition does not necessarily translate into a diminished role for fossil fuels in geopolitical calculations.

For the Global South, these realities necessitate a pragmatic approach. Embracing renewable energy is essential not only for environmental reasons but also for long-term economic sustainability. However, this must be pursued alongside a recognition that fossil fuels will remain central to global systems for the foreseeable future. Energy policy, therefore, must be multidimensional, combining investment in renewables with strategies to ensure access to traditional energy sources.

At the same time, there is a need for greater collective engagement among developing countries. The asymmetries of the global energy system where a small number of powerful states exert disproportionate influence highlight the importance of coordination and cooperation. By articulating shared interests and advocating for more equitable frameworks, countries in the Global South can seek to mitigate some of the structural disadvantages they face.

Ultimately, the persistence of oil as a strategic resource is not simply a reflection of technological limitations; it is a product of political choices and power dynamics. The actions of major powers, particularly the United States, demonstrate that control over energy remains a central objective of global strategy. While the language of renewables and sustainability will continue to shape public discourse, the underlying logic of geopolitics tells a different story one in which fossil fuels remain deeply embedded in the pursuit of power.

For Bangladesh and others in similar positions, the challenge lies in navigating this dual reality. It is a world where the promise of a green future coexists with the persistence of fossil-fueled competition; where calls for sustainability are interwoven with strategic calculations; and where the path to energy security is as much about diplomacy and geopolitics as it is about technology. Recognizing this complexity is the first step toward crafting policies that are both realistic and resilient in an uncertain global order.