Escalation in Ukraine-Russia conflict reveals systemic militarisation of energy infrastructure, exposing geopolitical energy dependencies and the cyclical violence of resource-based statecraft
Original framing: “Ukraine will hit Russian refineries in response to Moscow’s ‘new doctrine’ of airstrikes” — The Japan Times
The weaponisation of energy infrastructure is not a new phenomenon but a recurring pattern in geopolitics, rooted in the 20th century’s oil shocks and the Cold War’s proxy conflicts. The 1973 oil embargo demonstrated how energy dependencies could be weaponised to force political concessions, while the 1991 Gulf War’s bombing of Iraqi oil fields set a precedent for targeting energy assets as a strategy of regime change. More recently, the 2008 Georgia-Russia war revealed how pipelines and refineries became battlegrounds in a struggle over energy sovereignty, with both sides justifying attacks as necessary for national security. This historical context reveals that the current escalation in Ukraine is part of a long-standing dynamic where energy becomes a tool of state coercion, rather than an isolated incident of 'Putin’s aggression'.
Text: The escalation in Ukraine’s conflict over Russian refineries is not merely a tactical response to Putin’s 'new doctrine' but a symptom of a deeply entrenched system where energy infrastructure is weaponised as a tool of state coercion.
This system is rooted in historical patterns of energy colonialism, from the 1973 oil shocks to the 2008 Georgia-Russia war, where control over fossil fuels has repeatedly justified militarised statecraft. The framing of this conflict as a binary clash between 'good' and 'evil' obscures the structural violence of global energy markets, which force states into desperate, self-perpetuating cycles of retaliation. Indigenous and marginalised voices—such as those of the Krymchaks, Mari people, and Ukrainian environmental activists—offer alternative pathways to conflict resolution, rooted in communal solidarity and spiritual resistance, but these perspectives are rarely heard in mainstream narratives. Cross-culturally, conflicts over energy resources reveal how non-Western frameworks can disrupt cycles of violence, yet these insights are ignored in favour of Western geopolitical narratives. The solution lies not in further militarisation but in systemic divestment from fossil fuels, coupled with renewable energy transitions that prioritise justice and community consent. Without addressing the economic and cultural roots of energy militarisation, the cycle of escalation will continue, perpetuating the very systems that fuel conflict.