Rising Energy Competition and Energy Security in Northeast Asia: Issues for U.S. Policy

By Chanlett-Avery, Emma

Book Id: WPLBN0000124018
Format Type: PDF eBook:
File Size: 0.3 MB
Reproduction Date: 2008

Title:	Rising Energy Competition and Energy Security in Northeast Asia: Issues for U.S. Policy
Author:	Chanlett-Avery, Emma
Volume:
Language:	English
Subject:	Government publications, Legislation., Government Printing Office (U.S.)
Collections:	Government Library Collection
Historic Publication Date:
Publisher:	Government Printing Office


Citation APA MLA Chicago Chanlett Avery, B. E. (n.d.). Rising Energy Competition and Energy Security in Northeast Asia: Issues for U.S. Policy. Retrieved from http://www.self.gutenberg.org/

Excerpt
Summary: Asia has become a principal driver in world energy markets, largely due to China’s remarkable growth in demand. As the gap between consumption and production levels in Asia expands, the region’s economic powers appear to be increasingly anxious about their energy security, concerned that tight supplies and consequent high prices may constrain economic growth. Rising energy competition in East Asia promises to impact U.S. policy in many ways, from contributing to price spikes because of China’s rapidly increasing demand to altering the geostrategic landscape in the years to come as regional powers struggle to secure access to energy supplies. This report analyzes the short-term and long-term impact on U.S. interests of alternatives being pursued by China, Japan, and South Korea to bolster their energy security. It also examines decisions being made by Asian states now that will significantly shape global affairs in the future, how these decisions might play out, and how Congress and the executive branch might play a role in those decisions.

Table of Contents
Contents Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 The Role of Congress . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Profiles of Country Energy Sectors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Japan’s Energy Sector . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Japan’s Engagement with the Middle East . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Alternatives to Petroleum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Tension with U.S. Over Iran . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Korea’s Energy Sector . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Alternatives to Petroleum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 North Korea Factor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 China’s Energy Sector . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Growing Dependence on the Middle East . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Government Activism and Diversification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Many Challenges Ahead . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Rising Competition Over Access to Oil and Gas in the Russian Far East . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Diplomatic and Economic Rivalry over Angarsk Pipeline . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Assessing the U.S. Interest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 More Competition Ahead? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Implications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Short-Term Impacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Possible Mid-Term Implications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Bilateral Relationships with Asian Allies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Possible Long-Term Strategic Ramifications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Enhanced Regional Cooperation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Heightened Sensitivity of Sea Routes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Increased Russian Stature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Renewed ‘Great Game’ Rivalries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Casus Belli for Major Conflict? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Options for Congress and Executive Branch Policymakers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Taking a More Aggressive Approach to Securing Exclusive U.S. Access to Energy Supplies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Bilateral Measures with U.S. Allies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Greater Bilateral Efforts with China . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 U.S. Leadership in Developing Multilateral Energy Cooperation Frameworks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Iran-Libya Sanctions Act (ILSA) Enforcement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22