Connect with us

News

Top shale boss says US oil companies will not flock back to Russia

Published

on

Top shale boss says US oil companies will not flock back to Russia

Unlock the White House Watch newsletter for free

US oil producers are not going to rush back into Russia following any peace agreement between Moscow and Kyiv because they have been badly burnt in the past, according to US shale magnate Harold Hamm.  

The Continental Resources’ founder and prominent donor to Donald Trump’s election campaign told the Financial Times that Russia had been a tough place to work for decades and he was thankful he had not followed others who ploughed money into the world’s third-largest oil producing nation.

“A lot of people lost a whole lot of money over there. I think they’re going to be very reticent to want to go back. Once in a while, peace breaks out over there, but not very often,” said Hamm in an interview.

Advertisement

The start of talks between US and Russian officials this week fuelled speculation that American companies could return to Russia, if a peace deal can be agreed and sanctions are relaxed on Moscow. Russian officials specifically flagged the potential for joint investments in hydrocarbons by US and Russian companies, including in the Arctic.  

“We know there are US oil companies which would like to return to Russia,” said Kirill Dmitriev, head of Russia’s sovereign wealth fund, who attended the talks with US officials in Riyadh.

ExxonMobil and Chevron, the two largest American oil companies, declined to comment.

Exxon has a long history of investing in Russia but has pulled back following the imposition of western sanctions following Moscow’s invasion of Crimea in 2014 and its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022.

The company pulled the plug on a joint venture with oil company Rosneft to explore Arctic waters in 2018. Four years later Exxon took a $3.4bn impairment charge when it wrote down the value of its stake in the Sakhalin-1 oil project in Russia’s far north-east.

Advertisement

Other western companies got hit harder. BP reported a nearly $25bn writedown linked to its shareholding in Rosneft and other businesses while Shell made a $5bn writedown on its Russian assets in 2022.

Most analysts agree with Hamm that US oil majors will think long and hard before investing following any peace deal due to the geopolitical risks, and opportunities elsewhere.

“Political risks remain sky-high — sanctions relief could be reversed with a US administration change. Companies won’t rush back into a market where rules shift overnight,” said Tatiana Mitrova, a research fellow at the Center on Global Energy Policy at Columbia University.

Hamm, who co-ordinated fundraising among oil and gas interests during Trump’s election campaign worth at least $75mn, said the president had a big decision to make on whether to lift sanctions.

“They can be very effective. Particularly with secondary sanctions, which apply to anyone who transports or handles or trades,” he said.

Advertisement

Hamm said US liquefied natural gas exports would continue to play a critical role in ensuring Europe’s energy security. Europe could depend on the US, despite tensions over Ukraine, he said, adding that the continent’s leaders would be “silly” if they went back to relying on Russian piped gas.

“Europe, those countries are allies, and we’ve always stood up for them. I think they generally stood up for America. I think they should trust President Trump to look out after their best interests as well . . . We’re a country with a rule of law,” said Hamm.

He rejected allegations made by Democrats and other critics that Trump was ignoring the rule of law through some of his actions, which include curtailing birthright citizenship and giving Elon Musk access to government departments to slash spending and jobs.

“Obviously, [Musk] is doing a tremendous service. You know we have had runaway government for the last four years,” he said.

Hamm said Trump was the “most consequential president in modern history” by accomplishing so much in his first 30 days, including exiting the Paris climate accord and slashing environmental rules restricting industry.

Advertisement

Despite concerns within the oil industry that Trump’s threat to impose steep tariffs on Canada and Mexico would raise costs and increase petrol prices, he said they were necessary to tackle other problems.

“The border was number one consideration. Immigration and we had to stop the flow of drugs into this country,” said Hamm. “With Mexico and Canada, the tariffs are probably not going to be big factors if they will co-operate in the future.”

Asked if he thought Trump might try to seek a third term in office, even though this ran contrary to the US constitution, he said he could not contemplate such a thing.

“Thank God we have someone standing up there beside the president — JD Vance. I think he is looking forward to the next term.”       

Advertisement

News

Ed Martin, outspoken Justice Department lawyer, is formally accused of ethical violations | CNN Politics

Published

on

Ed Martin, outspoken Justice Department lawyer, is formally accused of ethical violations | CNN Politics

Ed Martin, an outspoken Trump administration official, is facing attorney discipline proceedings in Washington, DC, for a letter he sent to Georgetown Law about its diversity programs, the district’s professional conduct investigator announced on Tuesday.

Martin is formally accused of violating his ethical codes as an attorney for telling Georgetown Law’s dean last year that his Justice Department office wouldn’t hire students because of the school’s diversity, inclusion and equity initiatives programs, according to the filing from Hamilton Fox, the disciplinary counsel for DC who acts as a quasi-prosecutor on attorney discipline matters.

Unlike unsolicited complaints, Fox’s formal disciplinary complaint kicks off professional conduct proceedings for Martin in which he will need to respond and could be sanctioned or ultimately lose his law license.

Fox’s announcement on Tuesday marks the first major bar discipline proceeding against a high-profile administration official or attorney supporting President Donald Trump during Trump’s second term. Several Trump lawyers faced disciplinary proceedings after the efforts to overturn Joe Biden’s victory in the 2020 presidential election, including Rudy Giuliani, who lost his law license.

“Acting in his official capacity and speaking on behalf of the government, he used coercion to punish or suppress a disfavored viewpoint, the teaching and promotion of ‘DEI,’” Fox wrote in the complaint. “He demanded that Georgetown Law relinquish its free speech and religious rights in order to continue to obtain a benefit, employment opportunities for its students.”

Advertisement

Martin was removed from the top prosecutor job in DC after senators made clear he would not be confirmed to the role, but has remained at the Justice Department in several roles, including as pardon attorney.

“Mr. Martin knew or should have known that, as a government official, his conduct violated the First and Fifth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States,” Fox wrote.

Martin is being represented by a Justice Department attorney, a source told CNN.

A spokesperson for DOJ attacked Fox’s complaint. “The DC bar’s attempt to target and punish those serving President Trump while refusing to investigate or act against actual ethical violations that were committed by Biden and Obama administration attorneys is a clear indication of this partisan organization’s agenda,” DOJ said.

Martin had sent the letter to Georgetown Law while serving temporarily as US attorney for DC, a prominent Justice Department position, and told the school his federal prosecutors’ office wouldn’t hire Georgetown’s law school students. It came at a time when the Trump administration was beginning to crack down on universities for their DEI efforts.

Advertisement

In his letter, Martin claimed a whistleblower told him that the school was teaching and promoting DEI.

Martin also violated attorney ethics rules by contacting judges of the DC court directly, Fox alleged, rather than going through official channels, once he was informed he was under investigation for his professional conduct. The DC Court of Appeals ultimately signs off on attorney discipline findings.

Early last year, Fox’s office had formally asked Martin to respond to a complaint it received by a retired judge regarding the Georgetown letter.

Martin instead wrote to the judges on the DC court complaining about Fox.

“In that letter, he stated that he would not be responding to Disciplinary Counsel’s inquiry, complained about Disciplinary Counsel’s ‘uneven behavior,’ and requested a ‘face-to-face meeting with all of you to discuss this matter and find a way forward,’” Fox wrote.

Advertisement

“He copied the White House Counsel ‘for informational purposes because of the importance of getting this issue addressed,’” Fox said.

The top judge in the DC courts told Martin the court wouldn’t meet with him about the disciplinary matter and that he would need to follow procedure.

With Fox’s complaint, there will now be several steps ahead of bar discipline authorities looking at Martin’s action, and Fox didn’t specify how Martin should be reprimanded or punished if the discipline boards and the court ultimately determine he violated his ethical codes.

Spokespeople for the Justice Department didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment on Tuesday morning.

In recent days, Attorney General Pam Bondi announced her office would have a more powerful role in reviewing attorney discipline complaints against Justice Department attorneys, potentially setting up an approach that could keep the department at odds with the bar on behalf of DOJ attorneys facing their own individual disciplinary proceedings.

Advertisement

CNN’s Paula Reid contributed to this report.

Continue Reading

News

Europe and Asia battle for LNG as Iran war chokes supply

Published

on

Europe and Asia battle for LNG as Iran war chokes supply

Unlock the Editor’s Digest for free

Asian and European buyers are battling to source liquefied natural gas after the war in the Middle East choked off shipments through the Strait of Hormuz, blocking a fifth of global supplies.

In an indication of the intensifying contest for LNG since the US and Israel launched strikes on Iran, a handful of gas carriers have abruptly changed course while sailing to Europe and swung towards Asia instead, according to ship monitoring data analysed by the FT.

Countries across Asia are highly dependent on oil and gas sent through the Strait of Hormuz, a critical waterway where shipping has slowed to a near standstill.

Advertisement

Most of the LNG produced in Qatar and the United Arab Emirates is ordinarily shipped through the strait to Asia, and Asian LNG prices surged almost immediately after war broke out, creating an incentive to divert US gas to the region.

Some content could not load. Check your internet connection or browser settings.

Taiwan, South Korea and Japan are among the countries that need to source LNG to make up for supplies they will not receive from the Gulf, said Massimo Di Odoardo, head of gas and LNG analysis at consultancy Wood Mackenzie.

Taiwan relied on Qatar for more than 30 per cent of its gas consumption in 2025, according to Citigroup, while for South Korea and Japan the figures were 15 per cent and 5 per cent respectively. Asia typically uses more gas than Europe in the hotter summer months because of more air-conditioning use, creating urgency for Asian utilities to secure cargoes.

The vast majority of LNG is sold under long-term contracts rather than on the spot market, but some buyers are able to change the final destination of their purchases and some sellers are willing to break contracts if prices rise high enough.

Advertisement

By Thursday, surging European gas prices and rocketing shipping rates had swung the balance back against diversion of US LNG to Asia, according to data company Spark Commodities.

The decision on where to send gas carriers can depend on the relative levels of the European gas price, Asia’s JKM benchmark for LNG and shipping rates.

Some content could not load. Check your internet connection or browser settings.

For European buyers, the battle with Asia for LNG supplies is eerily familiar to the situation four years ago after Russia slashed pipeline natural gas flows to the continent following Moscow’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine. Competition for spare cargoes then pushed prices to record levels.

On Monday, European gas prices reached as high as €69.50 per megawatt hour, more than double their level before the Iran conflict began. Even so, prices are still far from the €342 per megawatt hour reached in 2022.

JKM gas prices also more than doubled since the start of the war to $24.80 per 1mn British thermal units by Monday, equivalent to €73.10/MWh.

Advertisement

European buyers have learnt from their experience in 2022. “Europe has more weapons at its disposal in this extreme price scenario to try and fight,” said Alex Kerr, a partner at law firm Baker Botts.

Buyers had started putting clauses in contracts to say that suppliers would face much higher penalties if they diverted cargoes for commercial gain, Kerr said.

There is also much more LNG on the market now that is not committed to set destinations, largely because of new projects starting in the US.

While producers such as Qatar impose strict rules on where its LNG can be sent, almost all US exports are allowed to sail wherever buyers want. Several analysts said there had also been an increase in the willingness of some producers to break contracts for financial advantage.

This makes diversions more likely, while the reluctance of some European buyers to sign long-term supply contracts before the outbreak of war this month could prove costly.

Advertisement

Expectations of a global supply glut convinced some European buyers that it would be cheaper to wait until later in the year to sign supply deals.

Wood Mackenzie’s Di Odoardo said the buyers had also held off on LNG purchases because new EU legislation on methane emissions made it unclear whether they could incur penalties in the future.

The risk of prices rising as Europe and Asia fight for available cargoes is increasing every day the Strait of Hormuz stays almost closed.

Gas is more difficult to store and to carry in tankers than oil, making its markets more vulnerable to shortages and price shocks.

“The longer the Strait remains shut, the greater the risk that the shipping disruption turns into a genuine gas shortage, as tankers cannot load and facilities have limited storage,” said consultancy Oxford Economics in a research note.

Advertisement

Additional reporting by Harry Dempsey in Tokyo. Data visualisation by Jana Tauschinski

Continue Reading

News

Is Iran another Iraq? : Sources & Methods

Published

on

Is Iran another Iraq? : Sources & Methods
Poor planning, overly ambitious goals, not thinking through the aftermath. These are the parallels that Richard Haass sees between the 2003 U.S. invastion of Iraq and its current air campaign against Iran.Haass was in charge of planning for the invasion as a top official in the State Department. He was a voice of dissent within the administration. Now he’s president emeritus of the Council on Foreign Relations and author of the Home & Away newsletter. He talks to Host Mary Louise Kelly about the Trump administration’s foreign policy and national security apparatus and where he sees it falling short on Iran.Email the show at sourcesandmethods@npr.orgNPR+ supporters hear every episode without sponsor messages and unlock access to our complete archive. Sign up at plus.npr.org.
Continue Reading

Trending