One fresh target of President Trump’s efforts to reshape international institutions is a Paris-based organization whose research and statistics contribute to the development of international energy policy.
Analysis pointing to a diminishing future for fossil fuels and a necessity to embrace wind and solar power have irritated Republicans in Washington, DC, and the 32-country International Energy Agency. According to various sources in the energy business and former U.S. officials who were privy to the matter, the Trump administration is now requesting that the agency’s No. 2 head be replaced with someone who is more in line with the president’s ideas, as reported by HEADLINESFOREVER’s E&E News.
Historically, an American has held the role of second-ranking official in the IEA. Since 2021, Mary Warlick, a former career diplomat from the State Department, has held the position of second-in-command.
Trump has spent months trying to sway global power centers to his side, including trade conflicts, requests for increased defense expenditure by NATO members, and withdrawals from organizations like UNESCO and the World Health Organization. The latest pressure is coming from Washington. Additionally, senior Trump administration officials, including Energy Secretary Chris Wright, have publicly complained about the IEA for months and have threatened to either stop U.S. sponsorship for the organization or demand reforms from it.
According to some Republicans, the International Energy Agency has deterred investments in fossil fuels by releasing reports that predict world demand for oil and gas will peak in the near future. Nothing that the IEA makes is universally well-received. “It’s just not,” remarked Mark Menezes, who was Trump’s first term’s deputy secretary of energy. “And there has been a shift in the political climate.”
“Conquer from within”
The energy lobbyist is a Republican with connections to the DOE who claims the Trump administration is trying to force reforms from inside.
Like others aware with the US attempts, the lobbyist was offered anonymity so they could talk freely. “They want to get operatives in there, whether they’re career or political, who can actually move the needle,” they said. “They will find an ally they can confide in, and that ally will battle from the heart.”
“The fact that Wright is out there now talking about it publicly shows that it’s elevated,” the lobbyist added, referring to the United States’ attempt to exert pressure on the IEA.
House Republican appropriators are joining the chorus of those criticizing the IEA by proposing a bill to cut off U.S. financing to the organization beginning October 1.
In addition to the White House’s silence on the matter, a representative from the Energy Department also declined to address specific concerns voiced by E&E News. According to the IEA’s statement, “reasons of privacy and confidentiality” prevent the organization from disclosing details on individual worker contracts.
One of the former US officials who had strong ties to the IEA praised Warlick, describing her as a “hardworking, serious, diligent and capable professional” who always follows the executive director’s and member nations’ instructions.
After the Arab oil embargo of 1973, the United States played a role in establishing the International Energy Agency (IEA) to address energy security. Major investments and government decisions are influenced by the organization’s statistics and projections published for the energy industry today. Numerous studies have run counter to the White House’s claims that fossil fuels are superior to renewable energy sources like wind and solar in terms of reliability and cost.
The United States would have less say on IEA matters if it left.
According to Jonathan Elkind, a former assistant secretary for international affairs at DOE under the Obama administration, the United States has traditionally had significant influence at the agency and has been successful in collaborating with other member states to further its purpose.
According to Elkind, the current U.S. government has every right to push for changes to the IEA’s agenda, since there will be some policy issues on which it strongly disagrees with other member countries. “It is unreasonable for the United States to expect that everyone will behave differently because of its actions.”
Amanda Maxwell, managing director of global engagement at the Natural Resources Defense Council, an environmental group, criticized the idea of withdrawing from the IEA, calling it misleading and narrow-minded.
“Unfortunately, trying to disregard objective data is par for the course for the Trump administration,” Maxwell remarked. “This administration is attempting to shroud us in ignorance regarding climate science and energy trends, among other things.”
Optimal situations
According to Wright, the IEA’s prediction that oil consumption will reach its peak this decade is “nonsensical” (as he put it in a June interview with Breitbart). Republicans were also upset that the Biden administration used an IEA report to back its decision to put new LNG export permits on hold until 2024.
Last year, during his testimony at a Senate hearing, David Turk—who was Biden’s deputy energy secretary at the time—cited IEA data showing a decrease in world demand for natural gas. Some market experts have voiced skepticism about the practicality of the Trump administration’s plans to significantly boost U.S. natural gas exports and use trade pressure to get allies to purchase large quantities of the fuel. However, the government is now placing heavy bets on the contrary happening.
In addition, the International Energy Agency has said that the Paris Climate Agreement of 2015, which seeks to keep the increase in global temperatures to levels that are less than catastrophic, is incompatible with any new oil and gas developments. In his inaugural address as president-elect, Trump stated that the United States will be withdrawing from the agreement.
Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) and then-Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-Wash.), now retired from Congress, wrote in a letter to IEA Executive Director Fatih Birol in March 2024 that the IEA has strayed from its mission and become a “cheerleader” for the “energy transition.” Birol has reiterated the group’s dedication to energy security even as it has recognized its expanded mandate.
Meanwhile, in February, Trump directed the State Department to conduct a six-month evaluation of the United States’ involvement in international organizations and treaties, with the recommendation to withdraw from any that do not align with his values.