US strategic calculus and leverage over China

Today we greatly enjoyed hosting Dr. Tatiana Mitrova, Global Fellow at the Center on Global Energy Policy, Director of the New Energy Advancement Hub, and Senior Research Fellow at the Oxford Institute for Energy Studies. Tatiana is an expert in energy systems, geopolitics, energy markets, and institutional decision-making, with particular emphasis on structural constraints, resilience, and risk. Born in Russia and now based in Cyprus, she brings a valuable perspective to the current turbulence involving Russia, Ukraine, Iran, and the broader global energy system.
 
In our conversation, we explore how the Russia-Ukraine war has evolved into a form of energy warfare, with drone attacks and other strikes increasingly targeting refineries, export terminals, pipelines, and broader energy infrastructure, forcing Russia’s energy sector to shift from traditional energy security toward physical asset defense. We cover the interaction between the Ukraine war and the Iran conflict, particularly how higher oil prices, tighter global supply, and diverted U.S. attention are giving Russia additional strategic and financial breathing room, even as attacks on infrastructure create export constraints. Tatiana explains that the more realistic risk for Russia is not near-term collapse but gradual degradation, as the Kremlin continues to prioritize war spending over civilian welfare and relies on oil revenues, reserves, and social insulation to sustain the system. She also outlines why territorial gains in Ukraine remain essential to Putin’s domestic legitimacy, making a negotiated settlement far more difficult.
 
We discuss the likely Russian summer offensive, Ukraine’s growing effectiveness in drone warfare, and the increasing vulnerability of Russian energy infrastructure. Tatiana walks through the domestic backdrop inside Russia, including war fatigue without viable opposition, a population shaped by a strong “fortress Russia” narrative, and a growing divide between insulated urban populations and regions bearing the human cost of the war. We touch on Russia’s longer-term positioning, including the ongoing pivot of energy exports away from Europe and toward China and India, the pricing and dependency risks embedded in that shift, and why Russia views the Iran conflict opportunistically rather than ideologically. She also explains how she thinks about the broader U.S.-China-Russia power dynamic, in which energy flows remain a central lever. We close by covering the longer-term social and economic consequences of the war inside Russia, including the implications of large-scale mobilization, reintegration challenges for returning soldiers, and the reality that the full costs of this conflict are likely to unfold over a decade or more rather than in the immediate term.
 
For additional reading, Tatiana’s article, “Russia’s Hormuz Dividend: Revenue, Leverage, and Limits,” is linked here. Another recent article, “How the Iran War Is Changing Europe’s Energy Transition,” is linked here. It was an insightful discussion, and we can’t thank Tatiana enough for sharing her time and thoughts with us.
 
Mike Bradley started the show by noting that U.S. equity markets were up 1.5% to 2.0% on the day, while the 10-year U.S. government bond yield was modestly lower and global oil prices were higher (Brent up ~$6/bbl and WTI up ~$2/bbl). He highlighted that the Iran war has entered its second month, provided a handful of monthly energy and equity market performance statistics, and noted that there still appears to be a real disconnect in oil markets (“physical” versus “financial/paper”) and between oil markets (up 55% to 65%) and U.S. equity markets (down ~7%).