Rosneft Chief Says China, Not OPEC, Is Now Stabilizing Global Oil Markets

Igor Sechin, chief executive of Russia’s largest oil producer Rosneft and one of President Vladimir Putin’s most influential energy allies, said China has taken on a greater role in stabilizing global oil markets by sharply reducing its crude imports this year, arguing that Beijing’s influence is increasingly rivaling that of OPEC.

Speaking Thursday at a Russian-Chinese business forum in Vladivostok, Sechin said China had reduced its oil imports by 5.5 million barrels per day this year, a decline he said had helped absorb excess supply and stabilize prices without Beijing being part of any formal producers’ cartel.

“This year, China has effectively taken the lead from OPEC and, without being a member of any cartel, has managed to stabilize the global oil market by cutting its oil imports by 5.5 million barrels per day,” Sechin said.

The comments reflect Sechin’s long-standing skepticism toward OPEC-led production management and his broader argument that the balance of power in global energy markets is shifting toward major consumers with large strategic reserves and growing control over demand.

China is the world’s largest oil importer, making changes in its purchasing patterns highly consequential for producers from Russia and the Middle East to Africa and the Americas. A sustained reduction in Chinese buying can weaken global demand for seaborne crude, increase competition among exporters and put downward pressure on prices.

Sechin said China’s growing strategic petroleum reserves could further increase Beijing’s influence over the international energy market.

“I believe that further growth in China’s reserves will strengthen China’s role in the energy market, against a backdrop of OPEC’s waning influence and a reduction in the number of its members,” he said.

His argument points to an important change in the traditional structure of the oil market. OPEC and its wider OPEC+ alliance have historically exercised their greatest influence through the supply side, adjusting production to manage prices and prevent severe market imbalances. China, by contrast, can exert influence through the demand side because of the enormous volume of crude required by its refineries and the scale of its strategic inventories.

The development has caught Russia’s attention.

China has become a critical destination for Russian crude following Moscow’s invasion of Ukraine and the subsequent Western sanctions that sharply reduced Russia’s access to European energy markets. Russian producers have consequently become more dependent on Asian buyers, particularly China and India, to sustain export volumes.

The situation has given changes in Chinese purchasing behavior an outsized impact on Russian oil companies. If Chinese refiners reduce imports for an extended period, Russian producers could face greater pressure to discount their crude or redirect cargoes to other markets.

Sechin’s comments also carry a commercial dimension for Rosneft, whose business depends heavily on maintaining access to major Asian markets as Western sanctions continue to constrain Russia’s traditional energy trade.

At the same time, China’s lower imports do not necessarily mean that global oil consumption has fallen by the same amount. Import volumes can fluctuate because of domestic production, refinery maintenance, changes in commercial inventories and the use of crude already held in storage.

China has spent years building strategic and commercial petroleum inventories, giving its refiners greater flexibility over when they purchase crude from international markets. When inventories are high, refiners can reduce imports without necessarily reducing refinery activity immediately. That makes China’s stockpiling strategy an increasingly important variable for oil traders and producers.

Sechin’s assessment also comes as OPEC’s influence faces questions of its own. The producer group and its allies remain capable of affecting global supply through coordinated production policies, but maintaining discipline across a large alliance becomes more difficult when individual members have competing fiscal needs and incentives to maximize output.

The United Arab Emirates announced earlier this year that it would withdraw from OPEC, adding to concerns about the cohesion and future influence of the producer group. The broader issue is whether oil-market power is gradually moving away from a model dominated by producers toward one in which major consumers and their inventories play a greater role.

China’s importance in that transition is difficult to ignore. Its massive refining sector, expanding strategic reserves, and position as the world’s largest crude importer give Beijing several ways to influence the market without formally coordinating production with oil-exporting countries.

For Russia, however, energy experts believe that China’s growing influence presents both an opportunity and a vulnerability. Beijing provides a crucial market for Russian crude and has helped Moscow maintain oil export flows despite Western restrictions. But greater dependence on a single major buyer also leaves Russian producers more exposed to Chinese purchasing decisions and negotiating power.

Sechin’s remarks consequently amount to more than a criticism of OPEC. They reflect the multipolar nature of the global oil market, where the strategic decisions of major consumers can be almost as consequential as coordinated production cuts by exporters.

Analysts have noted that if China’s lower import demand persists and its petroleum reserves continue to expand, Beijing could acquire greater leverage over global crude flows, potentially forcing producers to compete more aggressively for access to the Chinese market. That would represent a significant shift in the traditional balance of the oil industry: OPEC may still control a substantial share of global supply, but China’s purchasing decisions have the power to determine how much crude producers can sell and at what price.