Blackmail or compromise? The behind-the-scenes story of the White House’s arm-wrestling match with Europe that led to the decision to release its strategic reserves
Efsyn.gr
October 2, 2026, 23:22
The Trump administration’s relentless pressure on Europe to release diesel reserves or face a ban on U.S. exports just before the arrival of winter divided and angered European leaders, confused oil companies and prompted accusations — albeit privately — of blackmail.
“Also… it worked,” Politico pointedly comments in its analysis of developments in the war over energy prices, which at this stage has put Trump in a position of strength, as the organized campaign of threats by White House officials produced the result Washington wanted.
The G7 countries — including France, Germany and Italy — announced that they would release 100 million barrels of diesel and crude oil from their strategic reserves over the next four months and, as if by magic, prices have already begun to fall.
The White House’s threats
A European diplomat, Politico reports, citing an official who was present at today’s EU discussions, explicitly characterized the White House demands as “blackmail.”
“EU member states interpreted the American request as blackmail and see it as a broader security issue,” the diplomat said.
During the meeting, officials tried to find a way to satisfy President Trump without yielding to his threats, while others wondered whether Europe could be certain that the American president would withdraw the threat and whether it should agree to his demands.
In private discussions, European diplomats were furious about the White House’s demands. Some capitals, including Berlin, reacted internally against the request for emergency talks, arguing that the Trump administration wanted to appease its electoral base ahead of the midterm elections.
The developments also angered at least one European diesel trader, who reportedly said: “So they are relying on Europe to bail them out, and they are threatening an export ban to force Europe to do it. That’s called blackmail.”
The White House, however, sees things differently. Kevin Hassett, director of the White House National Economic Council, told Politico: “The Europeans have different strategic reserves than the United States. They have huge quantities of products, particularly diesel, which we believe they have room to contribute to the global economy right now.”
The “chaotic” U.S. approach that pressured Europe
Commenting on the developments, a European energy official described the American approach as “chaotic.”
Instead of applying pressure through the International Energy Agency, American officials approached individual countries unilaterally, by phone or in person, and began floating ideas and proposals that changed from one day to the next.
One of the demands made public came from U.S. Energy Secretary Chris Wright on Wednesday in Berlin, when he called for the release of 120 million barrels. The following evening, American officials contacted Emmanuel Macron and asked for the release of 100 million barrels.
In addition, Chris Wright had already approached another senior European official about the issue the previous week, on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly.
Ultimately, despite the determination shown internally by the major EU countries on Thursday to coordinate a response and “escalate” the issue to the International Energy Agency, Europe’s leaders gave way one day later.
The decision was defensive, according to a diplomat from a G7 country, who agreed that the deal would help Trump in the midterm elections but would also protect G7 allies from the threat of an export ban.
“It is not a real victory for Trump”
Even so, some European diplomats said that the decision to release millions of barrels does not constitute a real victory for Trump. Rather, they argued, it represents a reaffirmation of commitments made last March to release 400 million barrels, most of which never reached European markets because they could not compete with cheaper U.S. crude.
Two senior officials agreed that Friday’s commitment was “fake.”
This analysis contradicts American claims that EU countries, particularly Germany and France, neglected their duties because they released only a small amount from their reserves. Under European legislation, those reserves must cover either 90 days of net imports or 61 days of consumption.
According to Politico, analysts at ClearView Energy Partners also point to ambiguity in the wording of the G7 announcement, which appeared to refer back to the March release.
The G7 ambiguities
“The words ‘commitments already fulfilled’ could suggest that some of the 100 million barrels announced could refer to quantities from collective action that have not yet been delivered,” ClearView notes.
At the same time, what remains unclear is how much of the release will come from the G7, from Europe or from other IEA partners.
Emmanuel Macron, for his part, rejected the idea that the White House had threatened G7 leaders into releasing oil from their reserves.
Macron rejected the suggestion that the White House had threatened G7 leaders in order to make them withdraw oil from their reserves.
“The tone of our discussion was not threatening; it was constructive,” Macron said. “We all agreed jointly to release these strategic reserves in the proportions I mentioned. No export ban. President Trump was absolutely clear on that point.”
It should be recalled that Wright had publicly opposed an export ban, arguing that it would ultimately lead to higher fuel prices. Bessent, whom Trump tasked last month with overseeing a study of the impact an export ban would have, also considered it a bad idea to halt diesel shipments from the United States, although he would implement the president’s decision on the matter.
Wright and Bessent also met last week with executives from oil companies, according to an industry executive and a European official. The two senior officials pressured the executives to contact their European counterparts and advise them to release diesel from their reserves in order to push prices downward.
“They tried to use their contacts with industry CEOs to put pressure on the EU,” the industry executive said shortly before the G7 announced that it would tap its reserves.
The oil industry, for its part, tried to convince the White House that banning diesel exports would reduce prices at the pumps but would quickly backfire, forcing fuel refineries to reduce operations because they would lose important foreign markets.
It would also have significant economic consequences for Europe and Latin America, both of which are customers of the United States for gasoline and diesel.
No comments:
Post a Comment