The Role of Energy in Russian Foreign Policy Course

Course Philosophy

Three core principles guide this curriculum:

• Energy as the Foundation of Russian Statecraft: Energy in Russian foreign policy cannot be understood as a purely commercial or technical phenomenon. It is simultaneously the material foundation of state power, the primary instrument through which Moscow exercises leverage over its neighbours, the revenue base that sustains military capacity, and the strategic currency with which it builds partnerships across Eurasia, the Middle East, Asia, and Africa.

• Analytical Pluralism: No single theoretical framework fully captures the complexity of Russian energy statecraft; petrostate models, rentier state theory, weaponised interdependence, energy coercion analysis, and dependency frameworks each illuminate distinct dynamics while obscuring others, and rigorous analysis requires deploying them in combination rather than selecting one as definitively correct.

• Rigour Without Caricature: Russian energy foreign policy is subject to analytical distortion in both directions; serious scholarship requires neither uncritical acceptance of Russian strategic narratives nor their ideological dismissal, but sustained engagement with empirical evidence, structural constraints, and the actual choices available to Russian policymakers.

No serious analysis of Russian external behaviour since the Soviet collapse can be conducted without sustained attention to how hydrocarbons, nuclear technology, pipeline infrastructure, and energy diplomacy have shaped the choices available to Russian policymakers and the constraints within which they operate. 

This course examines the role of energy in Russian foreign policy as a sustained analytical and strategic issue. It traces the historical foundations of Russian energy power from the Soviet period through the post-1991 transformation, the consolidation of state control over hydrocarbons under Putin, the weaponisation of gas supply in relations with Europe and the post-Soviet space, the eastern pivot towards China and Asian markets, and the strategic use of nuclear technology exports through Rosatom as a long-term instrument of geopolitical influence. 

The course also confronts the structural pressures bearing down on Russian energy power: Western sanctions imposed since 2014 and dramatically deepened after 2022, the global energy transition and its implications for hydrocarbon demand, the technological dependencies created by import substitution failures, and the long-term questions raised by Arctic development, critical minerals strategy, and the sustainability of state corporate governance in Gazprom and Rosneft.

MODULE I: Foundations of Russian Energy Power

Week 1: Why has energy become central to Russian foreign policy?

Week 2: Can energy sustain Russia's great power status?

MODULE II: Infrastructure Strategy and European Leverage

Week 3: Are energy infrastructures instruments of geopolitical architecture?

Week 4: How have energy crises and coercion shaped Russia's relations with Europe?

MODULE III: Regional Energy Diplomacy

Week 5: Can Russia pivot east through energy diplomacy?

Week 6: Is nuclear energy a geopolitical instrument?

Week 7: How does Russia use energy in the post-Soviet space?

MODULE IV: Sanctions, Constraints, and Strategic Adaptation

Week 8: Can sanctions weaken Russian energy power?

Week 9: Is Russia an energy power beyond hydrocarbons?

MODULE V: Global Diplomacy and Geopolitical Futures

Week 10: Can energy diplomacy expand Russia's global influence?

Week 11: Will the global energy transition weaken Russian geopolitical influence?

Week 12: What will Russian energy diplomacy look like in 2050?

Every week of this 12-week course is structured around four distinct learning pillars to ensure you build theoretical knowledge, practical skills, and critical awareness:

• Lecture: Core concepts, theoretical frameworks, and key debates.

• Workshop: Application of concepts to real-world empirical cases.

• Analytical Lab: Hands-on methodological training and data analysis.

• Reflexive Question: A direct challenge designed to unpack hidden systemic assumptions.

Deep Thinking

• What energy-related event, decision, or instrument is under analysis, and what are the verifiable material facts: the resources involved, the infrastructure deployed, the trade flows affected, and the key actors engaged? (Empirical baseline)

• Which Russian state actor, state corporation, or bilateral partner made the decision, and what domestic political pressures, revenue interests, and geopolitical calculations shaped their choices? (Agential mapping)

• Which theoretical framework, drawn from petrostate theory, weaponised interdependence, rentier state analysis, dependency frameworks, or energy coercion models, best explains the Russian strategy or decision, and what assumptions does it make about the relationship between energy resources and geopolitical power? (Theoretical application)

• What does this explanation fail to account for: whose interests in the targeted or partner state are rendered invisible, which structural constraints on Russian agency are overlooked, and where does the chosen framework mistake energy leverage for actual geopolitical outcome? (Analytical limitation)

• How does this episode appear from the perspective of the targeted state, a third-party buyer, or an analytical tradition outside the Western academy, and what does that perspective reveal about whose understanding of Russian energy power has been treated as the default account? (Reflexive critique)

Learning Outcomes

• Apply and critically evaluate theoretical frameworks for analysing energy and foreign policy: Explain and assess the major approaches (including petrostate models, rentier state theory, weaponised interdependence, energy coercion frameworks, and dependency theory) and apply them to specific episodes of Russian energy statecraft, clearly identifying what each reveals and what it conceals about the relationship between energy resources and geopolitical power.

• Analyse Russian energy power across its full strategic and regional dimensions: Assess how hydrocarbons, nuclear technology, pipeline infrastructure, and critical minerals shape Russian geopolitical interests and external behaviour across Europe, the post-Soviet space, China and Asia, the Middle East, and Africa, while evaluating the structural constraints (sanctions, technological dependency, corporate governance failures, and the global energy transition) that limit and shape Russian strategic adaptation.

• Interpret primary sources and construct rigorous analytical assessments: Critically evaluate policy documents, energy trade data, strategic frameworks, and corporate governance structures; compare Russian energy statecraft with that of other major energy powers; and construct independent, evidence-based analytical arguments that draw on both theoretical and empirical foundations without reproducing either Russian strategic narratives or their ideological dismissal.

• Develop strategic assessments and scenario-based foresight: Formulate professional-grade strategic analyses and policy recommendations under conditions of geopolitical uncertainty, including scenario-based assessments of Russian energy foreign policy over extended time horizons that engage with the structural forces shaping Russia's long-term strategic options.

Assessment

Assessment 1: Strategic Analysis (35% | 2,500 words)
Students select a specific episode, bilateral relationship, or policy instrument in Russian energy foreign policy from an approved list and produce a focused strategic analysis structured around the five-rule framework. The analysis must establish the empirical facts of the case and map the key actors, Russian state institutions, state corporations, and affected foreign governments and their respective interests and leverage positions; deploy at least two theoretical frameworks from the course to explain the strategic logic of the Russian approach and its outcomes; and assess where Russian energy leverage succeeded, failed, or produced unintended consequences for both Russia and the affected parties. The analysis must conclude with a reflexive assessment of how the episode appears from the perspective of the targeted or partner state, and what that perspective reveals about the limits of the dominant analytical account. Submission Deadline: End of Week 7.

Assessment 2: Capstone Research Essay (55% | 5,000–6,000 words)
The primary summative assessment for this course is a research essay addressing a substantive analytical question about the role of energy in Russian foreign policy. Students may develop an argument arising from any area of the course, provided they engage with relevant theoretical and empirical debates, draw on primary sources and academic scholarship, and advance an original analytical claim. The essay must deploy multiple theoretical frameworks, engage with the specific regional or thematic context of the chosen question, and produce a well-reasoned conclusion that goes beyond description of Russian energy behaviour to explain its underlying logic, evaluate its effectiveness, and assess its long-term strategic implications. A one-page essay proposal with a preliminary bibliography is submitted at the end of Week 7 for formative feedback and does not count towards the word limit. Submission Deadline: Sunday of Week 14 (Formal Assessment Period, following the conclusion of Week 12 teaching).

Assessment 3: Seminar Participation and Analytical Engagement (10% | Ongoing)
Participation is assessed continuously throughout the semester. Marks reflect the quality and consistency of engagement across three interconnected dimensions: contribution to seminar and workshop discussions, demonstrating the ability to apply theoretical concepts to empirical cases and to challenge competing interpretations with reasoned argument; performance in the weekly Analytical Labs, showing growing proficiency in applying course methodologies to live data and case material; and conduct in simulation and debate exercises, including the willingness to defend positions under adversarial questioning, respond to new evidence, and revise conclusions accordingly. Attendance is a prerequisite for participation credit, but marks are awarded for the quality and intellectual rigour of engagement rather than for the volume of contribution.

Submission, Formatting Requirements and Academic Integrity

• All written work must be submitted as a PDF file, regardless of the word processor used.

• Use font at 12 points Aptos or Arial. Pages must be numbered. Include your name, student number, course name, assignment title, and word count on the first page; a separate cover page is not required.

• The word count stated in the assignment brief is a guide to scope and depth, not a rigid threshold. Work within 10% of the stated count in either direction. The word count covers the main body of the text, including in-text citations, but excludes the reference list, any tables or figures, and any appendices.

• All written work must follow APA 7th edition throughout. In-text citations use the author-date format: (Yergin, 2020) or Yergin (2020) argues that… For direct quotations, include the page number: (Yergin, 2020, p. 47). The reference list appears at the end of the document, ordered alphabetically by surname. Do not use footnotes for references; footnotes may be used sparingly for substantive clarifications that would otherwise interrupt the argument.

• Formal policies on academic integrity and the use of AI tools vary by institution and will be communicated where applicable. The question beneath those policies does not change: Is the goal to understand, or simply to appear to have understood? A qualification obtained without the knowledge it is meant to represent is a transaction, not an education, and it shortchanges the holder as much as anyone else. I invest genuine effort in connecting students to scholarship, practitioners, and professional networks that extend well beyond any syllabus. Whether that investment meets a reciprocal commitment is, in the end, a question of character rather than compliance.

Literature

• Balmaceda, M. M. (2021). Russian energy chains: The remaking of technopolitics from Siberia to Ukraine to the European Union. Columbia University Press. 

• Perović, J. (2024). Fuel and power: Energy, trade, and Russian foreign relations from Lenin to Putin. Cambridge University Press. 

• Porter, J., & Vinokour, M. (Eds.). (2023). Energy culture: Work, power, and waste in Russia and the Soviet Union. Springer. 

• Shiraev, E. (2026). Russian foreign policy (2nd ed.). Bloomsbury Publishing. 

• Shiraev, E. (2025). Russian government and politics (4th ed.). Bloomsbury Academic.

• Syngellakis, S., & Brebbia, C. A. (Eds.). (2018). Challenges and solutions in the Russian energy sector. Springer. 

• Tsygankov, A. P. (2025). Russia’s foreign policy: Change and continuity (7th ed.). Bloomsbury Academic. 

• Tynkkynen, V.-P. (2019). The energy of Russia: Hydrocarbon culture and climate change. Edward Elgar Publishing. 

Research articles do not appear in the bibliography above. This is intentional. Each week, students are expected to identify a peer-reviewed article relevant to that week’s topic, bring it to the seminar, and share it with the group. The lecturer contributes selections alongside the class. This practice develops independent literature-searching habits, exposes the seminar to a wider range of scholarly perspectives than any fixed reading list could provide, and keeps the course in sustained contact with current debates in the field.

Course Structure and Content

MODULE I: Foundations of Russian Energy Power

Week 1: Why has energy become central to Russian foreign policy?

Core Question: What historical, political, and structural factors transformed energy from an economic asset into the primary instrument of Russian foreign policy?

Topics: Energy and Russian state power: historical foundations from the Soviet period to the present; the post-Soviet transformation of Russian energy assets across privatisation, oligarchy, and renationalisation; resource nationalism and the consolidation of state control under Putin; theoretical frameworks including petrostate models, rentier state theory, and the concept of energy statecraft.

Cases: Soviet energy legacies and their significance for post-Soviet Russian foreign policy; the renationalisation of Yukos and the political economy of Kremlin energy control.

Analytical Lab: Students construct a diagram of Russia's principal energy export relationships, financial flows, and infrastructure dependencies, identifying where energy translates directly into geopolitical leverage and where that translation is contested or fails.

Reflexive Question: To what extent does framing energy as the foundation of Russian great power politics risk overstating Moscow's strategic agency while understating the structural constraints (technology gaps, governance failures, and external market conditions) that shape what Russian policymakers can actually do?

Week 2: Can energy sustain Russia's great power status?

Core Question: What have hydrocarbons genuinely delivered for Russian foreign policy ambition, and where do their structural limits lie?

Topics: Hydrocarbons and geopolitical influence: revenues, capacity, and the limits of resource power; oil and gas rents and their distribution across fiscal policy, military spending, and political stability; state capitalism and the political economy of Gazprom and Rosneft; resource dependency as strategic vulnerability across price volatility, technological limits, and economic diversification failures.

Cases: Russian oil and gas export revenues and their translation into foreign policy capacity from 2000 to 2024; the political economy of Gazprom as a strategic asset, rent distribution mechanism, and foreign policy instrument.

Analytical Lab: Students analyse the relationship between oil price cycles and Russian foreign policy assertiveness across specific historical periods, assessing whether the correlation supports a petrostate model or requires more nuanced theoretical explanation.

Reflexive Question: Do petrostate and rentier state frameworks adequately capture Russian energy politics, or do they overfit a model developed in different political-economic contexts and obscure the distinctively authoritarian form of state capitalism that characterises the Putin system?

MODULE II: Infrastructure Strategy and European Leverage

Week 3: Are energy infrastructures instruments of geopolitical architecture?

Core Question: How has Russian pipeline and energy infrastructure strategy functioned as a form of geopolitical architecture, and what does its disruption and potential replacement reveal about the future of Russian energy statecraft?

Topics: Pipeline geopolitics: strategic design, transit politics, and the coercive use of infrastructure; the Nord Stream projects: construction, political controversy, and their destruction in September 2022; TurkStream and the reorientation of Southern European gas supply; the Druzhba pipeline and Russian oil infrastructure in Central and Eastern Europe; Arctic LNG infrastructure and the maritime energy dimension.

Cases: Nord Stream 1 and 2: the political economy of their construction and the strategic consequences of their destruction; TurkStream: Turkish-Russian energy diplomacy and the leveraging of transit geography; Russian Arctic LNG infrastructure including Yamal LNG and Arctic LNG 2, and the sanctions-induced disruption of their development.

Analytical Lab: Students map the Russian pipeline and LNG infrastructure network, assess the leverage each system creates and its current condition following sanctions and physical disruption, then evaluate the strategic options available to Russia for rebuilding or replacing those instruments of influence.

Reflexive Question: Whose strategic imagination does pipeline geopolitics primarily reflect, and how do the perspectives of transit states, energy-importing states, and communities living alongside infrastructure corridors challenge the state-centred analytical frameworks that dominate the field?

Week 4: How have energy crises and coercion shaped Russia's relations with Europe?

Core Question: When did Russian energy coercion work, when did it fail, and what does its ultimate exhaustion reveal about the limits of energy as a geopolitical weapon?

Topics: Energy dependence and coercion: theoretical frameworks and the European case; the 2006 and 2009 Russia-Ukraine gas crises: causes, dynamics, and European consequences; the 2021 to 2022 supply manipulation and the energy weapon in the context of war; European decoupling: speed, costs, and strategic implications for Russian foreign policy.

Cases: The January 2009 gas crisis: complete supply cutoff, European emergency, and its institutional aftermath; Russia's reduction of gas flows to Europe from 2021 to 2022: coercion, market manipulation, or strategic miscalculation; the rapid post-2022 European energy pivot and the evaporation of Russian pipeline leverage over the continent.

Analytical Lab: Students evaluate a specified episode of Russian energy coercion against a European target, assessing the strategic objectives pursued, the instruments deployed, the response of the target state, the role of European institutions, and the ultimate effectiveness of the coercive strategy.

Reflexive Question: How does framing Russia-Europe energy relations as a story of Russian coercion and European vulnerability risk concealing the degree to which European energy companies, member state governments, and institutional actors were active participants in constructing the dependency they later decried?

MODULE III: Regional Energy Diplomacy

Week 5: Can Russia pivot east through energy diplomacy?

Core Question:  How far can the eastern pivot compensate for the loss of European markets, what political dependencies does it create, and does China's growing leverage over a sanctions-weakened Russia constitute a strategic problem that Russian policymakers acknowledge but cannot easily address?

Topics: Russia-China energy relations: gas, oil, and the infrastructure of the eastern pivot; the Power of Siberia pipeline and its successors: capacity, politics, and strategic implications; Russia-India energy relations: discounted oil, sanctions evasion, and the limits of the relationship; Asian energy markets and Russian export diversification across Japan, South Korea, and Southeast Asia.

Cases: Power of Siberia 1 and the negotiations for Power of Siberia 2: what the terms reveal about the China-Russia energy relationship; Indian imports of discounted Russian crude after 2022: scale, mechanism, and strategic significance; Russian LNG exports to Asia and the disruption caused by Western technology sanctions on Arctic projects.

Analytical Lab: Students assess the Russia-China energy relationship from both sides, identifying the interests, dependencies, and leverage points of each party, then evaluate how far the eastern pivot constitutes a genuine strategic reorientation or a structurally unequal accommodation to Chinese terms.

Reflexive Question: Does the vocabulary of the eastern pivot import Western assumptions about what constitutes strategic agency, and how does this episode appear from Beijing's perspective, from which it may look less like Russian strategic initiative and more like structural accommodation to Chinese terms?

Week 6: Is nuclear energy a geopolitical instrument?

Core Question: How does the Rosatom model work, where has it been most effective, where has it encountered limits, and how is competition from Western and Chinese suppliers reshaping the nuclear export landscape?

Topics: Rosatom as a foreign policy instrument: the business model and its geopolitical logic; long-term infrastructure dependency through nuclear technology exports; the geography of Rosatom engagement across Europe, the Middle East, Asia, and Africa; competition in the nuclear export market from Western suppliers, Chinese state corporations, and the South Korean model.

Cases: Rosatom in Hungary: the Paks II project and its persistence despite EU political pressure; Rosatom in Turkey: Akkuyu and the deepening of Russian-Turkish energy interdependence; Rosatom in Africa: engagement with Egypt, South Africa, and Ghana as instruments of influence in the Global South.

Analytical Lab: Students evaluate a specified Rosatom engagement in a third country, assessing the strategic interests of both parties, the dependencies created, the domestic political dynamics in the client state, and the implications for Western or Chinese competitors seeking to displace Russian influence.

Reflexive Question: Does framing Rosatom engagements as instruments of Russian geopolitical influence underestimate the agency of client states in using Russian nuclear infrastructure for their own developmental and diplomatic purposes, independently of Moscow's intentions?

Week 7: How does Russia use energy in the post-Soviet space?

Core Question: How has Russian energy statecraft functioned as a distinctive regional model in the post-Soviet space, how far has it survived the post-2022 strategic rupture, and what has replaced it where Russian leverage has diminished?

Topics: Energy and regional influence in the post-Soviet space: the political economy of subsidised supply and selective coercion; Belarus and the energy-security trade: subsidised hydrocarbons and deep political dependency; Ukraine as the central case: pipeline transit, supply disputes, and the energy dimension of the conflict; Central Asia: pipeline competition, transit politics, and the erosion of Russian monopoly; the South Caucasus: energy infrastructure and frozen conflict.

Cases: Belarus-Russia energy relations: the political economy of subsidised dependency from 2000 to the present; Central Asian gas and the emergence of Chinese pipeline competition as an alternative to Russian transit routes; the South Caucasus energy corridor and the interplay between commercial energy infrastructure and Russian strategic interests in Georgia and Azerbaijan.

Analytical Lab: Students develop an analysis of Russian energy leverage in a specified post-Soviet state, mapping the instruments deployed, the political relationships they sustain, the countermeasures available to the target state, and the degree to which that leverage has changed since 2022.

Reflexive Question: How far does the framing of Russian energy statecraft in the post-Soviet space as coercive control reproduce a Cold War analytical lens that obscures the genuine commercial, political, and social complexity of energy relationships in the region?

MODULE IV: Sanctions, Constraints, and Strategic Adaptation

Week 8: Can sanctions weaken Russian energy power?

Core Question: What has the Western sanctions regime on Russian energy achieved, where have its effects been most significant, and what do its limits reveal about the structural constraints of energy sanctions against a major producer?

Topics: Western sanctions on Russian energy: design logic, phasing, and sectoral scope; technology sanctions and their implications for Russian upstream production capacity; the G7 oil price cap: mechanism, compliance, enforcement, and real-world effects; Russian adaptation strategies across export redirection, alternative payment systems, and import substitution.

Cases: Sanctions on Russian LNG technology: the disruption of Arctic LNG 2 and its consequences for Russian production ambitions; Russian oil export redirection after 2022 through shadow fleet operations, price discounting, and Asian buyer engagement; import substitution in the Russian energy sector: achievements, failures, and long-term technological dependency.

Analytical Lab: Students are assigned roles as analysts advising either a Western government designing a new sanctions measure or a Russian strategic planning body assessing adaptation options, then present their assessments to the seminar for critical evaluation.

Reflexive Question: Whose interests does the Western analytical consensus on sanctions effectiveness primarily serve, and how do the perspectives of Global South states that have continued trading with Russia complicate the dominant narrative about the isolation and weakening of Russian energy power?

Week 9: Is Russia an energy power beyond hydrocarbons?

Core Question: What lies beyond the conventional hydrocarbon story of Russian energy power, and what does it reveal about Russia's long-term strategic position?

Topics: Arctic energy development: reserves, accessibility, technological requirements, and sanctions constraints; critical minerals as a dimension of Russian resource power including nickel, palladium, titanium, and rare earth elements; state corporate governance in the Russian energy sector: Gazprom, Rosneft, and questions of long-term sustainability; infrastructure modernisation and technological dependency in the Russian energy sector.

Cases: The Yamal LNG and Arctic LNG 2 projects: ambition, foreign partnership, and sanctions disruption; Russian nickel and palladium exports and their strategic significance for Western industrial supply chains; Gazprom's governance failures and their consequences for Russian foreign policy capacity.

Analytical Lab: Students evaluate the long-term sustainability of Russian energy power, assessing the assets that extend beyond conventional hydrocarbons, the technological and governance constraints that limit their development, and the implications for Russian foreign policy capacity over a twenty-year horizon.

Reflexive Question: Does the emphasis on hydrocarbons in analysis of Russian energy power reflect the actual structure of that power, or does it reflect the interests and priorities of the Western analytical community that has produced most of the scholarship on Russian foreign policy?

MODULE V: Global Diplomacy and Geopolitical Futures

Week 10: Can energy diplomacy expand Russia's global influence?

Core Question: How far does Russian global energy diplomacy constitute durable influence, where does it face structural limitations, and how does it intersect with the broader project of building a multipolar international order on terms favourable to Moscow?

Topics: OPEC Plus and Russian influence over global oil markets: mechanism, the relationship with Saudi Arabia, and its limits; Russia-India energy relations in the post-2022 context: commercial pragmatism and strategic ambiguity; Russian energy diplomacy in Africa: Rosatom engagements, LNG ambitions, and soft power narratives; multipolar energy diplomacy and Russia's positioning in a fragmenting global order.

Cases: OPEC Plus production agreements and their management: Russia's role, interests, and the tensions with Saudi Arabia; Russian oil discounts and Indian import expansion after 2022: the terms, the scale, and the strategic significance; Russian engagement with African states on nuclear and energy infrastructure across Egypt, South Africa, Ethiopia, and beyond.

Analytical Lab: Students represent assigned states and organisations, including Russia, Saudi Arabia, India, an African state, and a Western government, in a structured negotiation over a global energy governance arrangement, advancing position papers and engaging with competing interests under conditions of geopolitical pressure. This is Part One of the two-session strategic simulation; scenario details and role assignments are distributed at the end of Week 7.

Reflexive Question: How does Russian energy diplomacy's appeal to anti-colonial solidarity appear from the perspective of African or Asian states with their own histories of resource exploitation, and to what extent does Russia's multipolar narrative conceal relationships that reproduce rather than challenge structural dependency?

Week 11: Will the global energy transition weaken Russian geopolitical influence?

Core Question: What does the global energy transition threaten for Russian foreign policy, what adaptation options remain available, and on what timeline is the transition likely to constitute a decisive strategic constraint?

Topics: Decarbonisation and its implications for hydrocarbon-dependent states: theoretical frameworks and competing scenarios; the energy transition and Russian export revenues across scenarios, timelines, and strategic uncertainty; Russian adaptation strategies including critical minerals, hydrogen, and domestic transition politics; the geopolitics of uneven decarbonisation and differential transition rates across Russian export markets.

Cases: European Green Deal implications for Russian gas export revenues: modelling the scenarios; Russian hydrogen diplomacy: ambitions, barriers, and the realism of the pivot to green exports; Russia's critical minerals endowment and the degree to which it constitutes a transition-era strategic asset.

Analytical Lab: Students continue the simulation from Week 10, reaching or failing to reach negotiated outcomes in a context shaped by transition pressures, then deliver individual five-minute reflective presentations on their strategic reasoning and what the exercise revealed about the adaptability of Russian energy statecraft under structural constraint. This is Part Two of the strategic simulation.

Reflexive Question: Who benefits most from the dominant Western framing of the global energy transition as inevitable and rapid, and how does that framing look from the perspective of hydrocarbon-dependent states, including Russia, that are being asked to accept structural economic disadvantage on a timeline set by others?

Week 12: What will Russian energy diplomacy look like in 2050?

Core Question: What plausible scenarios exist for Russian energy foreign policy by 2050, and what key variables will determine which trajectory proves more accurate?

Topics: Future Russian export strategies: Asian market consolidation, LNG expansion, and the limits of the eastern pivot; Arctic geopolitics in 2050: resource accessibility, military positioning, and great power competition in the High North; artificial intelligence, energy demand transformation, and the implications for Russian hydrocarbon revenues; long-term geopolitical scenarios for Russian energy power across adaptation, decline, and the conditions that distinguish them.

Cases: Arctic shipping route development and its strategic implications for Russian energy export geography and military posture; scenarios for Russian oil and gas revenues under different global temperature pathways and energy transition speeds; contrasting long-term scenarios for Russian energy foreign policy: sustained relevance versus structural marginalisation.

Analytical Lab: Students work in teams to construct and present two contrasting scenarios for Russian energy foreign policy in 2050, specifying the key variables, driving forces, and strategic implications of each, then subject each other's scenarios to critical scrutiny in open seminar discussion.

Reflexive Question: How do the assumptions embedded in strategic forecasting methodologies, including assumptions about rational state behaviour, market rationality, and technological determinism, shape which futures appear plausible and which are rendered invisible by the analytical frameworks themselves?

*** This course is designed to be adaptable. The weekly structure, assessment components, and reading load can be adjusted to suit the requirements of a particular higher education institution or the context of individual tutoring, and can be scaled to meet the demands of bachelor’s and master’s degree students alike. The analytical framework and intellectual ambitions of the course remain constant; the format is a starting point, not a constraint.

Updated – June 2026

I have done my utmost to ensure everything is correct, but if you spot any mistakes, please let me know, as I am only human after all. Additionally, if you have a recommendation for another excellent book that could enhance this course, please do share your suggestions.

Contact Form