By John Q. Hosedrinker 
In a recent interview with CNBC, former US President Donald Trump asserted that decreased energy prices could compel Russian President Vladimir Putin to end the war in Ukraine. Trump believes that a significant drop in oil prices would cripple Putin’s economy, leaving him with “no choice” but to cease hostilities. Specifically, he suggested that a further $10-per-barrel reduction in energy costs would be enough to alter Putin’s actions. This statement underscores Trump’s perspective on the economic levers that might be used to influence the conflict.
Read the original article here
Trump says Putin will stop killing if oil prices fall by US$10 per barrel. It’s a bold statement, isn’t it? The immediate reaction is one of disbelief, and frankly, a bit of head-shaking. The idea that a simple dip in oil prices can halt a complex and brutal conflict is, well, overly simplistic. It’s like thinking you can solve a global crisis with a single tweet. It seems that some people may actually believe that one person controls the price of oil, which is a fundamentally incorrect way to look at how global markets work.
This is a belief that speaks to a bigger issue, a tendency to look for easy answers to complicated problems. The world, and especially international conflicts, rarely have neat solutions. A simple financial lever, like the price of oil, isn’t going to magically stop a war. There’s more nuance involved. The assumption that a $10 per barrel drop would somehow force Putin’s hand is a stretch. It neglects the intricate web of motivations, power dynamics, and geopolitical strategies at play.
Of course, lower oil prices *could* create economic pressure on Russia, whose war machine is undeniably fueled by oil revenue. But, by no means will it stop killing. The Russian economy is heavily reliant on oil exports, so a significant drop in price would undoubtedly hurt them. That’s not exactly a revelation. Lower prices could also impact the US oil industry, with the potential to close wells. That would negatively impact American jobs and the economy, which would then go against whatever plan he has.
The idea of using oil prices as a tool to influence Putin is a reflection of the “America First” mindset, that prioritizes America’s own business, interests, and economic self-reliance above all else. If oil prices could be manipulated to hurt Russia, it would be tempting.
It’s also important to consider that there is a lot of political noise around the issue. Trump has a history of making outlandish statements, and these claims need to be taken with a grain of salt. This could be a calculated move, playing on the public’s desire for a quick fix to a complex problem, or trying to find a way around giving weapons to Ukraine. Or it could just be a reflection of a shallow understanding of the complexities of global economics and geopolitical strategy.
The comments make light of some very bad statements. Some people suggest it may be an attempt to distract from other potential problems, such as the alleged Epstein files. Or perhaps it’s just another attempt to avoid supporting Ukraine with weapons.
Even if lower oil prices could somehow be engineered, it’s a very big gamble. It might take a long time to have the intended effect. Furthermore, there is no guarantee Putin would respond in the way anyone hopes. He might dig in his heels, escalate the conflict, or find alternative sources of funding. It’s certainly possible that he would double down, and increase attacks.
The bigger picture shows how interconnected the world is. If the US were to push for dramatically lower oil prices, other oil-producing nations would likely push back. This could destabilize global markets and have unintended consequences for the US economy.
Also, the notion of a sudden oil price drop seems a bit far-fetched. The global oil market is complex, with many variables at play, and the rest of the world might not be willing to participate.
Trump also has a history of rolling back environmental policies and favoring the fossil fuel industry. He may also be hesitant to encourage the rise of electric vehicles and renewable energy sources, which, by reducing demand for oil, would likely lower prices. It’s a contradiction of sorts.
In all of this it’s important to be level-headed, and avoid the knee-jerk reactions. Global conflicts are complex. There is no one-size-fits-all solution. The idea that a single lever, like oil prices, can stop a war is an oversimplification that neglects the complex interplay of interests and motives involved.