As I understand it, OPEC has been setting the price, but Saudi Arabia is now quite happy to make unilateral decisions. Oil in the arctic has already increased the competition. Not that I think that's a good thing - too much global warming already from fossil fuels and far too much pollution and destruction involved in the extraction.
This post was edited by Benedict Arnold at January 7, 2017 10:42 PM MST
Assuming "we" means the USA because aM is mostly an American site and Trump is keen on Russia, Russia the ability to seriously infuence in the outcome of the crisis in Syria and hence who controls trade through Tartus, Syria's Meditarranean port, and what happens to the hundreds of thousands of refugees and their impact on the countries they adopt. Undisturbed access to oil reserves under the sea where the Arctic Ice is melting further each Summer and not fully returning each Winter. A possible source of trade, because Russia could possibly want a lot of American products. A chance to reduce the proliferation of nuclear bombs and military tension.
This post was edited by Benedict Arnold at January 8, 2017 1:02 PM MST
So outside of Syria we don't need them. Oil reserves are to be had elsewhere. As far as possible source of trade? Pie in the sky for now. We have plenty of trading partners. Reducing nuclear proliferation? No chance. Both sides help countries beneficial to them gain nukes while stopping countries from having them that are not beneficial. A nuke is more playing card than weapon.
It may seem unrealistic to think of trade with Russia, but so was the idea of trade with China thirty years ago, and now it represents a large fraction of total imports and exports. (15% for Australia. Don't know the US figure.) I don't think either Trump or Putin would be on such friendly terms unless they had already cemented agreements with each other. Trump's background in business suggests to me that there is little other likely motive. As to the idea that nuclear bombs are merely playing cards; I disagree. I think any single bomb is far too dangerous and expensive to be considered as just part of a strategy in a diplomatic game of power.
. 