China and Russia Vie to Dominate in Energy. Trump Is Handing Them the Win.

Russia’s President Vladimir Putin walks with China’s President Xi Jinping at a military parade last week. (Alexander Kazakov/ Sputnik / AFP / Getty Images)

About the author: Carolyn Kissane is the associate dean of the NYU-School of Professional Studies Center for Global Affairs, and the founding director of the SPS Energy, Climate Justice, and Sustainability Lab.

Chinese President Xi Jinping marked the 80th anniversary of Japan’s defeat in World War II last week with a once-a-decade military parade. Flanked by Russia’s Vladimir Putin and North Korea’s Kim Jong Un, he walked a red carpet before 50,000 spectators. Drones flew overhead while meticulously choreographed ranks of soldiers showcased the scale of China’s military modernization.

The spectacle projected a China that is no longer willing to accept America’s vision of the world. Xi is orchestrating a new global order—one that won’t be confined to its military might.

Last week, Beijing also tightened its ties with Moscow by signing a legally binding memorandum to advance the Power of Siberia 2 pipeline, a 50 billion cubic meter project that will redirect Russian gas flows eastward. This should be understood as a political move underscoring Beijing’s leverage. China knows Russia is isolated and under pressure, and that it can extract concessions from Russia for privileged access to strategic resources. With limited options in global markets, Moscow needs Beijing far more than Beijing needs Moscow.

The memorandum could also have geopolitical implications for global energy markets. If it is actually built, the pipeline could dampen China’s demand for U.S. liquid natural gas and prolong global LNG oversupply, just as the U.S. is betting on its own exports to enhance its economic and geopolitical influence.

Yet China isn’t choosing hydrocarbons above renewables; it is taking a highly diversified approach to its domestic energy security, turning its manufacturing capacity across emerging energy technologies into strategic leverage.

It has already built and installed the world’s most powerful floating offshore wind turbine. According to BloombergNEF, China will install three out of every four offshore wind turbines in the world this year. China has become a dominant global manufacturer of wind equipment and the largest supplier of solar panels and batteries. Its state-owned firms secure cheap financing, its long-term targets keep developers investing at scale, and its streamlined permitting quickens deployment. The result is a rapid and extensive buildout of renewables capacity, which strengthens energy security at home and competitiveness abroad.

This stands in deep contrast with the U.S.

The U.S. possesses the strongest energy landscape in the world: vast oil and gas reserves, world-class renewable potential, deep capital markets, and unmatched potential for technological innovation. Yet instead of leveraging these advantages, Washington is narrowing opportunities for greater energy abundance.

Most striking is the federal government’s recent stop-work order on Orsted’s Revolution Wind project off the coast of Rhode Island: 80% complete, fully financed, and permitted after years of review. In an August letter, the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management directed Orsted to halt activities to address “national security” concerns.

This wasn’t about adversaries or external threats. It was a selective political attack on the wind industry. Halting it at the eleventh hour sends a chilling message: Even projects that seem to clear every hurdle are at the mercy of politics. That unpredictability undermines investor confidence and casts doubt on whether the U.S. can be trusted to build the next generation of renewable energy infrastructure.

Such actions also reveal a gap in the administration’s understanding of security. Climate security is a critical part of the overall national security. Offshore wind diversifies the energy supply, buffers against turbulent oil costs, and mitigates rising carbon emissions.

To sideline new energy sources at this moment undermines economic security, too. U.S. electricity demand is on the rise, utilities are warning of supply constraints, and households are facing rising utility bills. The reduction in solar and wind installations is already having implications for energy jobs, weakening the employment outlook beyond 2025.

Trump is instead making LNG exports a centerpiece of his trade and foreign policies. But the global LNG market is heading toward oversupply, and the oil market is also looking at a supply overhang. OPEC members increased production substantially last month. U.S. producers are already making job cuts and adjusting their production targets downward amid the new supply and economic landscape.

China is pivoting more toward Russian pipeline gas, and India, the world’s fastest-growing energy consumer, is being tariff-bullied by Washington and seeking alternatives. Together, they represent the largest sources of future demand and are sending the same signal: They intend to buy less from the U.S. even under threats and pressure.

The irony is profound. The U.S. has every advantage: resources, technology, and capital. By politicizing renewables, delaying approved projects, and undermining investor confidence, it is eroding its own strength—just as China and Russia are moving in tandem to strengthen their energy leverage.

Mr. President, energy, economic, and national security are inseparable. To treat energy policy as a political weapon is to weaken the foundation of security itself.

Guest commentaries like this one are written by authors outside the Barron’s newsroom. They reflect the perspective and opinions of the authors. Submit feedback and commentary pitches to ideas@barrons.com.