The Strategy of US Reindustrialisation through Global Energy Adjustment (2021–2028)

Andriy Zakrevskyi. CEO of Newfolk oil gas. Deputy Director of the Ukrainian Energy and Natural Resources Association

3 December 2025. Kyiv, Ukraine

The illusion of chaos and the reality of the plan

Today, in December 2025, when global Brent prices are testing the $65 level and American drilling rigs in the Permian Basin are operating at the limits of their technical capabilities, we can finally put aside the political rhetoric and look at the US energy strategy as a single, cynical and brilliantly executed business plan.

Over the past five years, the world has been fed a narrative of an irreconcilable struggle between the "green" Biden and the "hydrocarbon" Trump. In reality, we have witnessed a perfectly staged game of "good cop, bad cop," with both administrations working toward a single goal: restoring America's industrial greatness through a controlled collapse in energy prices.

My "Oil Price Corridor" hypothesis argues that the chaotic market fluctuations were actually a movement along a clearly defined trajectory: from a peak of $90–120 (in 2022) to a target of $45 (by 2028). The goal of this movement is not simply to punish Russia or Iran, but to create conditions under which the reindustrialisation of the United States becomes economically inevitable and the Chinese economy loses its main competitive advantage.

THE ERA OF THE "GREAT COOLING" (2021–2024)

The "green" bluff as a tool of financial pressure

History will remember Joe Biden as the most controversial US president in the context of energy. Having come to power under the banner of combating climate change, he left the White House in January 2025 with an absolute historical record for oil production in the US — over 13.5 million barrels per day. How did this happen? Was it a failure of his policy? No. It was a brilliant, albeit cynical, success.

To understand the mechanics of the "Oil Corridor," one must set aside the environmental rhetoric and look at the movement of capital. The Democrats' climate agenda (Green Deal) was used not to physically shut down wells, but to sterilise investments in our geopolitical competitors.

Glasgow as a financial trap for OPEC. In November 2021, at the COP26 summit in Glasgow, the collective West, led by the United States, effectively declared oil a "stranded asset." A clear signal was sent to the global banking system: lending to long-term oil projects (with a payback period of 10-15 years) is risky.

The introduction of strict ESG standards led to large institutional investors starting to exit oil and gas assets en masse.

The result: the cost of capital for oil companies increased by 2–3 times.

A blow to competitors: This has primarily affected projects with long start-up cycles — Russia's Arctic shelf, and deepwater projects in Brazil and Africa. To launch a field in Siberia, needs billions of dollars in investment today and seven years of time. Who will provide this money if Biden says that oil will not be needed in 2030? No one.

The triumph of the "short cycle" (Shale Revolution 2.0). But there was one exception to this scheme that Washington kept quiet about. American shale (Permian Basin). Shale production has a unique economy: it is "quick money." A well is drilled in a month, reaches peak production in three months, and pays for itself in a year and a half. The policy of "intimidating investors" with long terms did not affect American shale producers. They continued to drill, taking advantage of high prices caused by underinvestment in the rest of the world. Biden artificially created a shortage of future supply in the world, which was filled by current supply from the United States.

Keystone XL as a symbolic deception. One of Biden's first decisions was to cancel the construction of the Keystone XL oil pipeline from Canada. Economists saw this not as environmentalism, but as market management through the creation of logistical bottlenecks. This decision forced the replacement of Canadian oil with Russian fuel oil (until 2022) and Venezuelan oil (later), which allowed the US to balance the market.

The Ukrainian paradox: War as a price regulator

The most tragic element of the "Oil Corridor" assumption is the role of the war in Ukraine. From the point of view of the cynical geoeconomics of the US, Russia's full-scale invasion in 2022 became a tool for resetting the global energy market. Washington's task was twofold: not to let Russia win, but also not to let it collapse instantly, keeping oil on the market.

Why wasn't a full embargo imposed? In the spring of 2022, the US Treasury Department came up with the concept of a price cap. If Russian oil disappeared overnight, the price of Brent would skyrocket to $150–200. This would have been an inflationary shock for the US. The Price Cap ($60) mechanism was created so that oil would physically flow (to India and China) but would not bring super profits to the Russian Federation financially.

The Urals-Brent spread as a war tax. The Biden administration's main achievement was the creation of a stable discount on Russian oil ($15–20). In effect, the US forced Putin to subsidise the economies of India and China at the expense of impoverishing his own budget, while keeping global inflation within reasonable limits.

Ban on strikes against oil refineries: The moment of truth. Spring 2024 became a litmus test. When Ukraine began methodically knocking out Russian oil refineries, Washington's reaction was harsh. The official reason was "rising energy prices." The real reason was fear of a diesel shortage on the global market before the elections. This confirmed that for the US, control over the price corridor is more important than the speed of Russia's collapse.

The result of the 2021–2024 phase. At the time of Trump's transfer of power, the situation looked like this:

1. The world had become accustomed to living without direct supplies from Russia.
2. Prices stabilised at $75–80.
3. American production was at its peak. Biden played the role of the "anaesthetist" who put the markets to sleep so that the "surgeon" Trump could begin the amputation.

Technological reshuffle: Venezuela and Iran

To understand Biden's actions, one needs to delve into the chemistry of oil. American refineries on the Gulf Coast (PADD 3) are designed for heavy oil. The shale revolution gave the US light oil, but the refineries needed the "heavy" oil that Saudi Arabia and Russia had previously supplied.

Operation Venezuelan Strike Breaker. At the end of 2022, the US Treasury issued a licence to Chevron to operate in Venezuela. This decision contradicted democratic rhetoric, but it was necessary. Venezuelan oil (Merey) replaced Russian Urals, allowing the US to balance its basket of raw materials for refineries and keep diesel prices stable.

Iran: Shadow balancer. In 2023–2024, the US "did not notice" the growth of Iranian exports to China. This oil reduced demand for Saudi raw materials in the PRC, destroying the unity of OPEC+. Biden used enemies (Iran) to weaken unruly friends (Saudi Arabia).

THE YEAR OF THE GREAT BREAK (2025). THE MECHANICS OF THE COLLAPSE

On 20 January 2025, Donald Trump returned to the Oval Office. The period of "fine tuning" was over. The era of brute force had begun.

"Reverse Nixon Shock": The Big Deal with the Saudis

In 1971, Nixon pegged the dollar to oil. In 2025, Trump pegged the security of the Saudi dynasty to low prices.

Bin Salman's Dead End Saudi Arabia's strategy of "price over volume" (keeping Brent at $85 through production cuts) failed. Their market share was taken over by the US and Iran.

The essence of the May 2025 agreement. Trump offered Riyadh:

• The US gives: a defence pact (protection from Iran), peaceful nuclear energy, technology.
• The Saudis give: Refusal to artificially maintain prices and transition to a "war of volume."

Consequences: "The tap is open." In the summer of 2025, Saudi Aramco increased production to 11 million barrels. The market collapsed, breaking through $70. This was a disaster for the Russian budget, as the Kremlin lost the support of OPEC+.

Asian ticks: India and Qatar

The blow to Russia's revenues in 2025 would have been impossible without its loss of premium markets in Asia.

The Indian Pivot. Saudi Arabia and the UAE offered Indian refineries long-term contracts, displacing Russian Urals. Trump added political pressure on Modi. As of December 2025, Russia's share of Indian imports fell from 40% to a critical 15%.

Qatar and the death of gas blackmail. Synchronised actions by the US (unblocking new LNG projects) and Qatar (expanding North Field) created a global gas surplus. Prices fell to lows, rendering Russia's Arctic LNG-2 project economically unviable and undermining the profitability of the green transition in Europe.

Pacification of the Levant and the Turkish Hub

The end of the Syrian knot. In early 2025, Russia was forced to leave Syria, transferring its spheres of influence to Turkey and Israel. This reduced the geopolitical risk premium in the price of oil by $5–7.

Turkey — Master of the Straits. Turkey has become an indispensable hub. Oil from Baku, Kazakhstan and Iraqi Kurdistan flows unhindered to Europe. The Black Sea has become a trade route that is not controlled by Moscow.

The new division of Central Asia: The Eagle and Dragon Pact

Kazakhstan: Raw Materials for the Dragon, Profits for the Eagle. In 2025, there was a de facto division of influence in Kazakhstan. China gained control over uranium and metals (Kazatomprom). The US retained control over oil (Tengizchevroil, Kashagan). Russia lost everything.

Middle Corridor. The China-Kazakhstan-Azerbaijan-Turkey-EU route became fully operational, providing access to the market for Central Asian resources bypassing the Russian Federation.

Uzbekistan: American bastion. The US has returned to Uzbekistan, making Tashkent the guarantor of security in the region. This alliance between the US and China (security + investment) has finally ousted Russia from the region.

ENDGAME (2026–2028). THE PRICE OF EMPIRES

The period from 2026 to 2028 will be a time of triumph for the "physical economy," when the price of oil is expected to reach $45 for the reindustrialisation of the US.

The "Alaska hammer" and the death of long futures

The Willow and ANWR effect. Trump's decision to open the ANWR reserve and the Willow project will create a hyper-backwardation effect on the market. Traders will see a future oil surplus in 2029, which will cause futures prices to collapse today ($40–50). This will kill investment in long-term projects by US competitors.

Guyana: Exxon's private petrol station. Guyana, which is not a member of OPEC, will reach 1.5–1.8 million barrels by 2027, becoming a tool for the US to quell any attempts by the cartel to create a shortage.

Why $45? The Economy of Reindustrialisation

The ultimate goal is to bring factories back to the US Rust Belt.

• At $70+: US industry loses out to Asia.
• At $30: American shale goes bankrupt.
• At $45–50: American petrochemicals and metallurgy gain an advantage over their competitors, and shale producers survive thanks to new technologies and volumes.

Chronicle of Russia's collapse (2026–2028)

At a price of $30–35 per barrel of Urals (netback), the Russian model of existence loses its meaning.

• 2026: Depletion of the National Welfare Fund.
• 2027: Hyperinflation due to currency issuance and infrastructure collapse (equipment wear and tear). Donor regions begin to move away from the unprofitable centre.

Ukraine: Place in the new matrix

Conflict of timings. The US is playing the long game (8 years). Ukraine needs results "yesterday". If Kyiv tries to break the "Oil Corridor" (e.g. with attacks that will drive up prices), funding will be cut off.

Political transformation. The Ukrainian government may transform into a team of technocrats ready for the "Fortress Ukraine" strategy: deaf defence, minimisation of losses and waiting for the enemy's economic collapse.

Security function. Ultimately, Ukraine will become Europe's security operator, integrating into NATO as the owner of a single combat-ready army that restrains chaos in the East. The price is giving up illusions about quick military solutions.

CONCLUSIONS

Andriy Zakrevsky's assumption of an "oil price corridor" is a description of the business plan of the "USA" corporation. The world is entering an era of cheap energy. For Russia, this means death. For the US, it means rebirth. For Ukraine, it means a marathon of survival, at the end of which victory awaits us, achieved through endurance and synchronisation with the global timing of "Big Oil".