What are its options in response? .. Why did the decision of OPEC Plus to cut production anger the United States?

Washington

 - Minutes after the OPEC Plus group announced a daily production cut of two million barrels, many statements and comments came out from various US decision-making circles to comment on this unexpected step.

A number of commentators questioned what is meant by reducing OPEC production, and does this step represent contempt for the United States, in which allied Gulf states participated?

And what can Washington do now?

The administration of President Joe Biden will consult Congress on additional tools and powers that ease OPEC's control over energy prices.

A White House statement, issued yesterday, Wednesday, indicated that the OPEC Plus step represents "a reminder that the United States must reduce its dependence on external sources of fossil fuels, and now with the passage of the inflation reduction law, Washington is in a position to make the most important investment in accelerating the transition." to clean energy and increased energy security, “by increasing our dependence on clean energy and energy technologies that are made and produced in the United States.”

Punishment and pressure on allies

White House officials criticized the production cuts, and White House spokeswoman Karen-Jean-Pierre described the decision as aligning with Russia, and accused allied member states of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries of allying with Russian President Vladimir Putin and supporting him in the war on Ukraine.

On the other hand, the decision angered Washington for pushing prices higher, amid fears of a global economic downturn, and fears of negative effects on American voters, who are heading on the eighth of next month to elect a new Congress.

And the Axios news site had indicated that two of President Biden’s senior advisers visited the Saudi capital only 10 days ago in an attempt that failed to influence the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia so that oil production would not be reduced, and the site indicated that the White House statement following the announcement of the OPEC Plus decision was not An ordinary statement and it was exceptional, as it came out, signed by National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan, and Director of the National Economic Council Brian Deese, this is unusual for the statements of the US administration.

Giorgio Cafiero, Executive Director of the Center for the Analytics of the Arab Gulf States in Washington, told Al Jazeera Net that there are also questions about the steps the United States might take to make Riyadh pay for the OPEC Plus plans to reduce oil production.

"Given that the armistice in Yemen expired at the beginning of this month, the dangerous and uncertain situation in the war-torn country could leave Saudi Arabia vulnerable to Houthi missile and drone attacks," Cafiero stated. The Saudis depend on the United States, the kingdom's security guarantor. , for protection, and this fact gives Washington some leverage that a number of US lawmakers are calling on the Biden administration to use in order to influence Saudi energy policies.

In an interview with Al Jazeera Net, Hussein Ibish, senior researcher at the Arab Gulf States Institute in Washington, indicated that the OPEC Plus decision "was taken in the context of the current international conditions, and it is easy to imagine, perhaps in just a few months, different circumstances that produce completely different accounts. Gulf countries.

America's limited options to respond

Ibish stressed that "Washington does not have many tools to respond to the OPEC Plus decision, because the commodity is replaceable, and the only producers that have much room to maneuver in terms of expansion instead of reducing production are the Gulf countries."

Abish considered in his speech that "what Washington can do is express its dissatisfaction bilaterally, in terms of potential arms sales, security-related cooperation and other forms of cooperation that the Gulf states do not wish to reduce, however, the levels at which these forms of Security cooperation is currently mutually beneficial, which means that Washington will suffer at least from any withdrawal as much as the UAE and Saudi Arabia. Therefore, it is difficult to use these tools, in the short term, especially since such oil pricing issues are temporary."

Abish predicted that the geo-strategic situation may change completely with the onset of winter in Europe, as the impact of reduced supplies that meet continuous or even increased demand will mean real economic and social suffering for millions of ordinary people, and this could change the calculations of some parties.

"The pressure on the Gulf states can come from the Europeans as well as from the United States. It can have an effect that supports the view that they tacitly support Russia's aggression, or at least they share some kind of common economic issues with it for reasons unrelated to the Ukrainian war, in different ways. ' says Abish.

He considered that the whole picture could change if Moscow was forced to reconcile with Kyiv, and added in his speech to Al-Jazeera Net, "Under these circumstances, looking at the OPEC decision as supportive of Russia will change, and in fact, at this point, the Europeans will look to reach Russian energy themselves, and it would be hard to overly criticize OPEC members."

Increase oil production and reduce exports of US refined petroleum products

Republican and Democratic members have long threatened to resort to adopting legislation to counter what they see as violations of competition rules against OPEC, but a number of observers considered these efforts "meaningless", and that if Washington wanted to exercise "real pressure" on the main Gulf producers, the United States would have to to begin withholding some security assistance and military cooperation.

For his part, Democratic Senator Ed Markey said he would resubmit a bill to ask the US Trade Representative to follow up on the file of monopolistic and anti-competitive practices of oil-producing countries.

On Wednesday, Democratic Senator Joe Manchin called for more US resources to be invested in producing more fossil energy.

"Today's announcement from OPEC Plus underscores why the United States must be energy independent and secure so that we are not intimidated by foreign adversaries," Manchin said in a statement.

Speaking to Al-Jazeera Net, Giorgio Cafiero said, "The White House has considered restricting exports of refined oil products. Officials in Biden's team have discussed this possibility with oil producers. Recognizing the recent decision taken by OPEC Plus, it seems likely that the United States government will take this step." .