Kurt Campbell on China's Approach to Energy Security and Statecraft

**Kurt Campbell** (0:04)
I think the most important steps that the United States could take is to secure our vital strategic position in the Indo-Pacific. But it is the dominant, innovative economies in Asia that, frankly, I think, beckon. And it would be there where I would like to see the focus diplomatically and strategically.

**Jason Bordoff** (0:28)
The conflict involving Iran has rapidly expanded, drawing in actors across the Middle East, and raising concerns about broader regional escalation. The implications extend well beyond the region itself. Energy markets are one clear channel. Roughly 80 percent of the oil and gas that flows through the Gulf is destined for Asia and disruptions there are already being felt across the Indo-Pacific, particularly in major importing economies including Japan and South Korea, which remain heavily dependent on Middle Eastern supplies. And the consequences go beyond energy. The crisis is adding a new layer of complexity to the US-China relationship in particular. Reshaping how Beijing thinks about risk, security and its role in a more unstable global system. So how is China interpreting these developments? What do they mean for the Indo-Pacific, both in the near term and over a longer horizon? And how might China's approach to energy security, supply chains and statecraft position it in a more volatile world? This is Columbia Energy Exchange, a weekly podcast from the Center on Global Energy Policy at Columbia University. I'm Jason Bordoff.
Today on the show, Kurt Campbell. Kurt is the Chairman of the Asia Group, which he co-founded in 2013 During the Biden Administration, he served as the 22nd Deputy Secretary of the United States Department of State. Before assuming his role at the State Department, Kurt served as the inaugural Indo-Pacific Coordinator at the National Security Council and Deputy Assistant to the President at the White House. Kurt joined me to discuss how China views American power in this moment, and what the current instability in the Gulf could mean for the Indo-Pacific. We also talked about his recent Foreign Affairs essay with Rush Doshi on why it's a mistake to underestimate China and their argument for what they call capacity-centric statecraft. And we explored how both the United States and China are approaching competition over energy security and supply chains. I hope you enjoy the conversation. Kurt Campbell, an honor to have you on Columbia Energy Exchange for the first time. Very good to see you again. Thanks for making the time. I think I invited you to come on when you and Rush Doshi wrote this really interesting Foreign Affairs piece on how we might need to think a little differently about the threat posed by China. But it takes a while to schedule, and now the timing turned out to be pretty good because we have lots of other crises and challenges to talk about that have huge implications, including for the Indo-Pacific and China. So I'll just start with the news of the day. This will come out a few days after we're talking. So things might change a little bit. But we obviously are deep into this crisis in the Middle East. The attacks on Iran, huge energy implications. And it's starting to change as we see the infrastructure attack on Qatar and on Iran's South Paris field. But energy markets have been reasonably restrained. I think largely because people thought this would be over soon, and there is an off-ramp. And I'd just love to hear, you've been so close to these issues for so long. How do you see what's happening right now? And what are the scenarios you see for how this might come to some sort of resolution? What do those even look like at this point?

**Kurt Campbell** (3:48)
Well, thank you, Jason. And I do agree that this is a deeply consequential time. And I was in New York yesterday and had a chance to interact with a variety of folks about the circumstances in the Gulf. And I was surprised at how much this team that prizes themselves on being objective want badly to be reassured that this is a conflict that will wind down quickly. I'm afraid that the recent developments suggest otherwise. I think last week the president received two kinds of military briefings.
One was essentially about what might be necessary to secure oil flows through the Persian Gulf and through the Straits. And remember, the attacks against oil capabilities from Iran have not just been at the lip there at the Straits, but throughout the Gulf, and it is a harrowing security challenge for any country that has signed the task of protecting oil flow. And so, when the president asked what was necessary to do that, I think he was told it would take substantially more naval capabilities on the part of the United States. We'd be best able to do it with allies and partners, and that even then, the challenges of dealing with waters that are potentially filled with mines, it is not lost on anyone that the US Navy doesn't have very many mind-sweeping ships. And on top of that is the potential of being attacked by relatively low-cost drones.