3 hours ago
The United States and Israel claim their escalating military actions against Iran focus on nuclear proliferation, deterrence, and regional security. However, recent events suggest a deeper, older rationale at play. The primary goal is not merely to weaken Iran or enforce regime change but to protect the flow of oil—the lifeblood of the global capitalist economy.
Take, for example, the recent US strike on Iran’s Kharg Island, the country’s main oil export terminal. Located just off the Gulf coast near the Strait of Hormuz, this strait channels about one-fifth of the world’s daily oil supply. Any disruption here would immediately impact global energy markets. Recent reports underscore how sensitive oil prices are to threats in this vital passage.
Yet, the most revealing aspect of the Kharg Island strike is not just that it happened, but what was intentionally left untouched.
US President Donald Trump publicly praised the operation, stating that American forces destroyed “every MILITARY target” on the island. Simultaneously, he stressed that the oil infrastructure remained intact. On Truth Social, Trump explained he chose not to “wipe out the Oil Infrastructure on the Island,” warning that such restraint might change if Iran threatened shipping in the Strait of Hormuz.
This distinction is telling. Kharg Island handles the vast majority of Iran’s crude exports. Destroying its oil terminals would have severely disrupted global supply and likely caused prices to soar. Instead, Washington executed a calibrated strike: inflicting military damage without crippling energy production.
The implication is clear. The US is willing to weaken Iran militarily but remains deeply committed to maintaining the oil flows that sustain the global economy.
Energy security has long shaped US strategy in the Gulf. Since the 1980 Carter Doctrine—which declared the region’s oil supply a vital American interest—Washington has prioritized Gulf energy infrastructure. The risk that Iran could block shipping through the Strait of Hormuz remains one of the most destabilizing threats to the global economy.
Viewed in this context, the Kharg Island strike appears less like a move toward total war and more like a signal. Iran’s military capabilities may be targeted, but the oil infrastructure supporting the global economy is a protected asset.
While the Kharg strike alone might be seen as escalation management, when considered alongside Washington’s actions in other regions, a consistent logic emerges.
This logic becomes clearer when examining other recent moves by the Trump administration. In Venezuela, for instance, Washington has intensified its confrontation with President Nicolas Maduro. Although US officials frame their pressure campaign around democracy and corruption, Venezuela holds the world’s largest proven oil reserves. Thus, control over Venezuela’s political future is inseparable from control over its oil production and sales.
If a more pro-US government were to take power in Caracas, Venezuela’s oil industry could be redirected toward Western markets and investments. This conflict is therefore not only ideological but also deeply material. Analysts have noted that Washington has long sought to reshape Venezuela’s oil sector to align more closely with US economic interests.
The same logic applies to Washington’s evolving stance on Russian oil. Despite framing Moscow as a strategic adversary, US policymakers have recently eased certain restrictions on Russian crude exports to stabilize global energy markets and prevent price spikes. Even confrontation with a strategic rival is adjusted when oil flows are at risk. This move highlights a broader reality: geopolitical rivalries often yield to the overriding need to maintain stable energy supplies. Whether the source is Russia, Venezuela, or the Persian Gulf, the priority remains consistent—keep the oil flowing and the global economy functioning.
This pattern extends beyond oil itself.
The same imperative now applies to critical minerals essential for future energy and technological systems. Trump has repeatedly revived the idea of acquiring Greenland—a territory believed to hold vast reserves of rare earth minerals and potentially significant energy resources beneath its Arctic seabed. These resources have become increasingly valuable amid technological competition and energy transitions.
Similarly, Washington has aggressively sought access to Ukraine’s rare earth minerals, vital for advanced electronics, renewable energy technologies, and military systems. Securing supply chains for these critical minerals has become a central strategic concern for major powers.
Across these cases, a consistent effort emerges to control the resources and infrastructure that sustain the global economy. Together, these moves reveal a coherent geopolitical strategy. Trump’s foreign policy increasingly reflects what might be called extractive imperialism—the drive to secure control over the resources powering global capitalism.
Oil remains central to this system. Despite decades of talk about renewable energy transitions, hydrocarbons still dominate the world’s energy supply. Global trade, transportation, and industry remain heavily dependent on steady flows of crude oil and natural gas.
The infrastructure enabling oil mobility—pipelines, export terminals, shipping routes, and refineries—has become one of the most strategically protected elements of the global economy.
The Kharg Island strike illustrates this dynamic with unusual clarity. Military targets were fair game; oil infrastructure was not. Violence was carefully calibrated to avoid disrupting the energy circulation on which the global economy depends.
The war with Iran is often framed as a struggle over nuclear weapons or regional influence. While these concerns are significant, beneath them lies a more fundamental geopolitical objective: preserving the energy arteries that sustain the global economic order.
What is at stake is not merely conflict between states but the management of a global system that cannot tolerate interruptions to its energy lifelines.
Oil has long shaped Middle East geopolitics. The Kharg Island episode shows it still does. Beneath the rhetoric of deterrence and security lies a familiar imperial imperative: keep the oil moving.
The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.
