Mideast Gulf states wary of US reset

  • Market: Crude oil, Natural gas
  • 23/10/20

A Biden administration could see the US revert to engagement with Iran, at the expense of Saudi Arabia and the UAE, write Samira Kawar and Haik Gugarats

Saudi Arabia and the UAE would be far more comfortable if US president Donald Trump wins next month's election, fearful that the Middle East policies of a Joe Biden administration would look like a continuation of Barack Obama's.

The Obama administration's prioritisation of the Iran nuclear deal — the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) — indirectly increased regional tensions as an alarmed Saudi Arabia assumed a more interventionist role to counter what it perceived to be growing Iranian influence. Trump's subsequent withdrawal from the JCPOA and reimposition and toughening up of sanctions against Iran came as a huge relief to Riyadh. If Biden becomes president, he will prioritise resurrecting the Iran nuclear deal, leading to a likely mitigation of US sanctions against Iran and paving the way for political de-escalation between Washington and Tehran.

A Biden administration would have limited room for other major foreign policy initiatives in the Middle East, given the US' focus on post-Covid-19 economic revival. But de-escalation with Iran could promote moves towards resolution of other conflicts regionally, including in Yemen, Iraq, Syria and Lebanon.

The UAE has managed to extricate its troops from Yemen, and is exercising its influence through proxy forces in the south of the country. Saudi Arabia is likely to welcome an opportunity to end its involvement in what has become an expensive quagmire, but Riyadh needs something to show for a military campaign that has lasted for more than five years. The Iran-aligned Houthi movement, which controls much of northern Yemen, remains capable of firing missiles at Saudi Arabia.

A successful de-escalation with Iran may improve the prospects of resolving the Yemen conflict, by encouraging Tehran to influence its Houthi allies to offer conditions acceptable to Riyadh. The latter remains opposed to the UAE-backed demand for a separate state in southern Yemen, but some analysts think that a federalist model could work in Yemen if Saudi Arabia would agree to a Houthi-dominated north. Failing a resolution of the Yemeni situation, the US under Biden would be prepared to help Riyadh protect its territories from Houthi missiles and to continue operations to prevent Iranian weapons from flowing to the Houthis.

Value judgment

Riyadh — the recipient of Trump's first state visit as president — could expect a colder reception under Biden. The US would "reassess our relationship with the Kingdom, end US support for Saudi Arabia's war in Yemen, and make sure America does not check its values at the door to sell arms or buy oil", Biden says. And his stated intention of promoting democracy and not overlooking human rights will be a reminder to some Gulf Co-operation Council governments — particularly in Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Bahrain — of what they viewed as the Obama administration's encouragement of the destabilising Arab Spring.

A Biden administration would not abandon the US alliance with Riyadh but would plan to push it to show greater progress on human rights, including accountability for the 2018 killing of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi. Pressuring Riyadh to show progress on political reform is seen as necessary to bolster the credibility of social and economic reforms under its Vision 2030 programme.

A US-Iran de-escalation under Biden would also be likely to end military tensions between them in Iraq, where Biden would want to preserve a modest US military force solely to combat remnants of Islamist group Isis. Saudi Arabia and Iraq are seeking to deepen their economic ties, and an easing of US-Iranian tensions could support this. But a resolution of the dispute between Saudi Arabia-UAE and Qatar may not be a priority for a Biden administration, as Washington's strong relations with all three remain unhampered by the row.


Sharelinkedin-sharetwitter-sharefacebook-shareemail-share

Related news posts

Argus illuminates the markets by putting a lens on the areas that matter most to you. The market news and commentary we publish reveals vital insights that enable you to make stronger, well-informed decisions. Explore a selection of news stories related to this one.

News
28/03/24

Mosaic plant sustains minor damage from fire

Mosaic plant sustains minor damage from fire

Houston, 28 March (Argus) — Florida-based phosphate and potash fertilizer producer Mosaic anticipates limited damage to a production plant near Tampa and minimal disruption to operations in the coming weeks following a brushfire on Monday. The brushfire ignited Monday evening during routine maintenance near Mosaic's Riverview phosphate production facility and was initially contained before rekindling Tuesday morning because of heavy winds. The fire was fully under control by Tuesday afternoon, according to local first responders. Mosaic told Argus on Tuesday the fire was not considered a threat to the facility initially, but now expects the plant sustained "limited damage to ancillary operations" and the impact could last between four to six weeks. The Riverview plant has a production capacity of 1.8mn metric tonnes (t) of processed phosphate products, and produces 30,000 t/week, according to Mosaic. The facility was producing phosphates primarily for exports to Brazil at the time of the fire, the company added. Smoke was observed Monday from the fire as a result of foam retardants used by local fire officials to cool the high-density polyethylene pipes. Polyethylene gas piping is often used for natural gas distribution. Natural gas flows delivered to the plant fell slightly Wednesday at 2.42mn cf/d, down from 2.45mn cf/d on Monday, once the fire was extinguished, according to data from Florida Gas Transmission. Flows at the plant on Thursday rebounded to 2.45mn cf/d, in line with expectations that affected phosphate output at the plant should only be temporary. By Taylor Zavala Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2024. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

Read more
News

Long-term contracts needed to stabilise gas prices: MET


28/03/24
News
28/03/24

Long-term contracts needed to stabilise gas prices: MET

London, 28 March (Argus) — Germany and Europe need more LNG and business-to-business long-term contracts to even out supply shocks and stabilise gas prices, even as demand is unlikely to reach historical heights again, chief executive of Swiss trading firm MET's German subsidiary Joerg Selbach-Roentgen told Argus . Long-term LNG contracts have a "stabilising effect" on prices when "all market participants know there is enough coming", Selbach-Roentgen said. He is not satisfied with the amount of long-term LNG supply contracted into Germany, arguing that stabilisation remains important even now that the market has "cooled down" after the price shocks of 2022. Long-term contracts are important for the standing of German industry, Selbach-Roentgen said — not to be reliant on spot cargoes is a matter of global competitiveness for the industrial gas market, he said. The chief executive called for more long-term contracts in other areas as well, such as for industrial offtakers, either fixed price or index-driven. Since long-term LNG contracts are concluded between wholesalers and producers, the latter need long-term planning security for their projects, which usually leads to terms of about 20 years. But long-term LNG contracts in general do not represent a major risk for MET nor for industrial offtakers in Europe, Selbach-Roentgen said. LNG is a more flexibly-structured "solution" to expected demand drops in regard to the energy transition as the tail end can be shipped to companies on other continents such as Asia if European demand wanes, he said. Gas demand is not likely to recover to "historical heights" again, mostly driven by industrials "jumping ship", Selbach-Roentgen said. When talking to large industrial companies, the discussion is often about the option that they might divert investments away from the German market as the price environment is "not attractive enough" for them any longer in terms of planning security, the chief executive said. This trend started out of necessity in reaction to the price spikes but may now be connected to longer-term "strategic" considerations, he said. In addition, industrial decarbonisation — as well as industrial offtakers' risk aversion because of the volatile gas market following Russian gas supply curtailments — leads companies to invest less into longer-term gas dependencies in Germany, Selbach-Roentgen said. In addition, MET advocates for a green gas blending obligation of 1-2pc green gas or hydrogen, in line with legislative drafts under discussion by the German government. This has already met with interest by offtakers, despite uncertainties around availability and prices, and would provide a regulatory framework that allows firms to prepare for the energy transition, Selbach-Roentgen said. By Till Stehr and Rhys Talbot Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2024. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

News

Stalling climate finance an energy security risk : WRI


28/03/24
News
28/03/24

Stalling climate finance an energy security risk : WRI

London, 28 March (Argus) — The "best bet" to achieving global energy security is through mitigation funding and multilateral cooperation, according to the World Resources Institute (WRI). WRI highlighted that governments are funding more domestic renewable energy projects but have increased oil and gas production in the name of "energy security" at home in the years following the Russia's invasion of Ukraine. The recent rebrand of energy transition funding to energy security funding has allowed some developed nations to justify domestic oil and gas licences and drag their feet on multilateral financial commitments. This is causing "real worry" among climate-vulnerable developing nations, WRI chief executive Ani Dasgupta said. He said that although the initial "shock" to the world's energy markets after the invasion of Ukraine "quickly went away", it has triggered "real worry among poorer countries that when push comes to shove, it won't be an even game, or have a fair outcome." Developing countries have long complained about the lack of access to climate funding. Richer nations have only recently met the $100bn/yr target in climate finance to developing countries agreed in 2009, while discussions on setting a new climate finance goal for 2025 at Cop 29 in Baku in November could prove difficult. President of the Republic of Congo (Brazzaville) Denis Sassou-Nguesso said last year that the $100bn/yr in climate financing to developing countries promised by rich countries "never reached us", adding that the annual UN Cop climate conferences have become little more than a talking shop. "Just after the invasion of Ukraine, every country started to think about energy security," Dasgupta said. "In theory, good things could have happened, countries could have concluded that their best bet to getting energy security is by going renewable". But it was not the case in key consumer countries or regions, Dasgupta pointed out. China bought the majority of Russian gas following the EU's withdrawal, he said, and has since upped production at coal-fired power stations despite an "extraordinary" acceleration towards renewables set for 2023-28, according to Paris-based energy watchdog IEA . In Europe, the UK and Norway continue to award new oil and gas licences . "In the US, the fossil fuel lobby argues that the best route to energy security is to invest more in fossil fuels". But the best route is to invest in more renewables, he said. "Even if the US produces a large amount of oil and gas, it is still a traded commodity, and so you have to pay a price for it that is set globally." The US special presidential co-ordinator for energy security Amos Hochstein has also suggested in September that a widening climate finance gap could ultimately threaten global security. "We have seen the percentage of dollars spent on the energy transition outside the OECD, in developing and middle income countries actually go down instead of up…" By Madeleine Jenkins Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2024. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

News

Louisiana pipeline crossing bill nears vote: Update


27/03/24
News
27/03/24

Louisiana pipeline crossing bill nears vote: Update

Updates scheduled timing of vote in first paragraph. New York, 27 March (Argus) — The Louisiana state senate is scheduled to vote next week on a bill seeking to clarify pipeline servitude rights and expedite pipeline crossing disputes, advancing legislation promoted by three natural gas pipeline companies involved in a legal battle with US midstream giant Energy Transfer. Natural gas transmission projects by Williams, Momentum Midstream and DT Midstream — which aim to connect growing production out of the prolific Haynesville shale to a wave of new LNG export terminals along the US Gulf coast — have been put on hold while legal proceedings between Energy Transfer and DT Midstream play out. All three companies' proposed pipelines would cross Energy Transfer's own Tiger pipeline in northern Louisiana. The three pipeline companies' projects propose an excessive number of crossings over the Tiger line, an attorney for Energy Transfer argued in a Louisiana senate committee last week, and Energy Transfer has the servitude rights to stop them. But Energy Transfer's "unique" interpretation of the civil code on pipeline crossings is hurting the economy of Louisiana, the author of the bill , Louisiana senator Alan Seabaugh (R), said last week. By blocking the construction of new pipelines out of the Haynesville, Energy Transfer is eliminating jobs and taxes that would be created by new infrastructure, he said. Moreover, by arguing its servitude rights extend above and below its existing pipeline "to the center of the earth," Energy Transfer is "asserting a right that nobody has ever asserted before," Seabaugh said. The Seabaugh bill clarifies that, unless explicitly stated otherwise in a contract, pipeline servitude rights extend only to the physical space occupied by the pipeline and any space necessary to maintain it. The contract stipulating Energy Transfer's servitude rights for the Tiger pipeline is silent on the subject of that vertical, underground space, according to bill supporters. "This really isn't about pipeline crossings — this is about controlling market share," said Jimmy Faircloth, attorney for Momentum Midstream. But the pipeline industry has been amicably working together for decades to allow for reciprocal crossings, Energy Transfer attorney Kay Medlin said. By ripping up this convention over a dispute involving so many crossings, and forcing an expedited legal proceeding for something which "is not a minor process," the Seabaugh bill threatens an industry "that ain't broke," she said. "This legislation will break it, and you will likely spend years trying to fix it, if you ever can," Medlin said. The Seabaugh bill is a companion to two bills which passed 100-0 and 99-0, respectively, in the Louisiana House of Representatives on 21 March. Those bills seek to clarify the law on pipeline crossings and to expedite proceedings on pipeline crossing disputes. By Julian Hast Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2024. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

News

Baltimore bridge collapse to raise retail fuel prices


27/03/24
News
27/03/24

Baltimore bridge collapse to raise retail fuel prices

Houston, 27 March (Argus) — The collapse of the Francis Scott Key Bridge in Baltimore, Maryland, is more likely to increase regional gasoline prices than diesel due to additional freight costs and certain route restrictions. Suppliers in the region have so far signaled that the effect on broader markets will be minimal, but regional prices will likely rise, especially as peak summer demand season begins with Memorial Day weekend in late May. The bridge closure could pose more problems for gasoline supply than diesel, since gasoline cannot be transported through the Fort McHenry (I-95) and Baltimore Harbor (I-895) tunnels — the two other major roads that cross the Patapsco River at Baltimore — while there are no restrictions on diesel, according to the Maryland Transportation Authority (MTA). Fuel wholesaler Global Partners said yesterday that it would like to see hours of service waivers for trucking in the region to minimize fuel supply disruption to customers, but the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) is yet to issue one. Elevated retail prices are likely to be limited to the immediate Baltimore area but could spill over into neighboring markets should trucking markets remain tight due to rerouting, market sources told Argus . Fuel markets in eastern Maryland can be supplied by PBF's 171,000 b/d Delaware City, Delaware, refinery and two further plants in Pennsylvania — Monroe Energy's 190,000 b/d Trainer refinery and PBF's 160,000 b/d Paulsboro refinery. To the north, United Refining runs a 65,000 b/d plant in Warren, Pennsylvania, and along the Atlantic coast Phillips 66 operates the 259,000 b/d Bayway refinery in Linden, New Jersey. PBF, Monroe and United did not immediately respond to a request for comment on whether the bridge collapse is affecting refinery operations. Phillips 66 declined to comment on commercial activities. Still, the five nearby refineries — representing all the Atlantic coast's 850,000 b/d of crude processing capacity — are unlikely to see their operations curtailed by limits in shipping products to Maryland. With no refinery in the state of Maryland, most fuels are delivered to Baltimore by Gulf coast refiners on the Colonial Pipeline. Global Partners, which operates a terminal just west of the collapsed bridge, said yesterday it is primarily supplied by the pipeline and expects product flows to continue. Several terminals in the Baltimore Harbor and the nearby Port Salisbury can also receive small vessels and barges of road fuels from Delaware and Pennsylvania, according to the Maryland Energy Administration (MEA). The Port of Baltimore — which remains closed since the collapse — took delivery of 24,000 b/d of gasoline and under 2,000 b/d of distillates from barges and small vessels in 2019, about three percent of the Atlantic coast's refining capacity. "A closure of the Port of Baltimore while the Colonial Pipeline is open would not significantly disrupt fuel supply," the MEA wrote in a 2022 analysis of liquid fuels supply in the state. By Nathan Risser Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2024. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

Business intelligence reports

Get concise, trustworthy and unbiased analysis of the latest trends and developments in oil and energy markets. These reports are specially created for decision makers who don’t have time to track markets day-by-day, minute-by-minute.

Learn more