The geopolitics of U.S. energy independence: nine noted observers offer their views.

• Position: A SYMPOSIUM OF VIEWS

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

It is possible that within a decade the United States will become an energy exporter as a result of new deep drilling oil exploration and natural gas shale "fracking" techniques, as predicted by noted energy expert Phil Vedeger in the lead article of the Spring 2012 issue of TIE.

How would or should U.S. foreign policy change in this new era of energy independence? Would America become less concerned with providing military security in the Middle East? What would this mean for the future of U.S.-Israeli relations? With the European countries becoming more dependent on Russia for energy supplies (at potentially far higher costs than Americans would face), and with Russia and Germany becoming closer economic partners, what are the implications for the future of NATO? On a broader note, to what extent would U.S. energy independence bolster isolationist foreign policy tendencies already in force in the United States?

Nine noted observers offer their views.

For the Middle East, perhaps more sincere confrontation with modernity will take place.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

DANIEL PIPES

President, Middle East Forum

An energy self-sufficient United States will have a particularly dramatic impact on the Middle East. First, Washington will be largely freed from having to know to the oil and gas pashas. Second, a loss of control over the price of energy will weaken the perceived strength of the oil-exporting countries. Third, they will probably experience lowered income.

In all, one of the core reasons that makes the Middle East so prominent in world affairs will diminish and with it the outsized presence of the region on the world scene. As it is a region suffering from deep maladies--extremist ideologies, conspiracy theories, tyranny, a culture of cruelty, a tribal social order, and more--that lesser role will be a healthy change. No longer quite so buoyed by energy revenue power and money, perhaps a more sincere confrontation with modernity will take place.

One should be cautious about jumping to conclusions.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

JOSEPH S. NYE, JR. University Distinguished Service Professor, Harvard University, and author, The Future of Power (2011)

Phil Verleger always makes an interesting argument. At this stage, one can only speculate about the geopolitical effects. Clearly, the strengthening of the U.S. economy enhances American economic power and runs against the current fashion of portraying the United States in decline. But one should be cautious about jumping to conclusions. A balance of imports and exports is only a first approximation of independence. As I argue in The Future of Power, interdependence involves both sensitivity and vulnerability. The United States may be less vulnerable in the long run if it imports less, but oil markets are fungible and our economy will remain sensitive to shocks from sudden changes in world oil prices. A revolution in Saudi Arabia or a blockage of the Straits of Hormuz could still inflict damage upon us, as well as upon our allies. Even if we did not have additional interests in the Middle East such as Israel or non-proliferation, it is unlikely that a balance of energy imports and exports will free us from military expenditures to protect oil routes that some experts estimate at $50 billion per year.

At the same time, America's bargaining position in world politics should be enhanced. Power arises from asymmetries in interdependence. You and I may both depend on each other, but if I depend less than you do, my bargaining power is increased, For decades, the United States and Sandi Arabia have had a balance of asymmetries in which we depended on them as the swing producer of oil and they depended on us for ultimate military security. Now the bargains will be struck on somewhat better terms from our point of view. In the area of natural gas, Russia has enjoyed leverage over Europe and its small neighbors through its control of supply through pipelines. As North America becomes self-sufficient in gas, liquefied natural gas from various regions is freed up to provide alternative sources for Europe and this will diminish Russian leverage. In East Asia, which has become the focus of American foreign policy, China will fred itself increasingly dependent on Middle East oil. American efforts to persuade China to play more of a role in producing public goods of stability in the region may be enhanced, and China's awareness of the vulnerability of its supply routes to American naval disruption in the unlikely case of conflict could also have a subtle effect on the balance of bargaining power.

A balance of energy imports and exports does not produce pure independence, but it does alter the power relations involved in energy interdependence.

The impact on U.S. foreign policy? Huge.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

ANDERS ASLUND Senior Fellow, Paterson Institute for International Economics

Phil Verleger has got it right. Today, there is little doubt that the new methods for producing unconventional natural gas and oil are causing a complete paradigm shift in the United States and the global energy situation. The United States is already self-sufficient in natural gas, and its dependence on oil imports is set to fall.

This change will have a huge impact on U.S. foreign policy. Most obviously, U.S. interests in the Middle East will decline along with U.S. energy imports. The United States is unlikely to engage in wars such as the Gulf War of 1991 or the war in Iraq, but presumably it will no longer accept being the global policeman either. The United States' reluctance to engage in Libya might be the new standard, and U.S. reluctance in Syria is even greater. U.S. defense expenditures will probably decline. The result may be more prolonged civil wars and failed states in the greater Middle East. European countries will feel greater pressure to...