AUSTRALIA’S FUEL CRISIS: HOW A RESOURCE-RICH NATION BECAME DEPENDENT — AND WHY NATIONALISM, NOT GLOBALISM, MAY HOLD THE ANSWER
By Jamie McIntyre, Founder of Australian National Review
⸻
A NATION THAT CAN’T FUEL ITSELF
Australia once had nine oil refineries. By the early 2000s, that number had already begun shrinking. Today, it has just two. Soon, it may effectively be operating with only one major facility.
Meanwhile, around 90% of Australia’s refined fuel is imported.
Think about that for a moment.
A country that exports raw energy resources ships crude offshore to be refined in mega-facilities in Singapore, Indonesia, and Malaysia… only to buy it back at higher cost.
This isn’t just inefficient. It’s strategically dangerous.
In any global disruption, conflict, or supply chain shock, Australia is not at the front of the queue. It’s at the end of it.
⸻
GLOBALISM VS NATIONAL INTEREST
According to McIntyre, the root cause is simple:
Australia stopped thinking like a sovereign nation and started behaving like a participant in a global system that assumes stability.
That assumption, he argues, is now being tested.
Policy frameworks over recent decades have encouraged:
•Outsourcing refining capacity
•Closing “uncompetitive” domestic industries
•Relying heavily on international supply chains
•Prioritising short-term efficiency over long-term resilience
The result is a nation that traded security for convenience.
⸻
WHAT A NATIONALIST POLICY WOULD LOOK LIKE
McIntyre argues fuel should be treated not merely as a commodity, but as critical national infrastructure.
Under a nationalist framework, Australia would:
1. Rebuild Domestic Refineries
•Government-owned or supported facilities
•Large-scale production aligned with national demand
•Subsidies if required, recognising fuel as a security asset
Profitability alone, in this view, should not determine whether such infrastructure exists.
⸻
2. Establish Strategic Fuel Independence
•Maintain significant domestic reserves
•Reduce reliance on foreign refining hubs
•Ensure supply continuity during global disruptions
The objective is simple: the ability to fuel the nation under any circumstances.
⸻
3. Rebuild National Industries
The fuel issue reflects a broader structural shift:
•Manufacturing capacity reduced
•Processing industries moved offshore
•Supply chains externalised
A nationalist approach would prioritise rebuilding domestic capability and reducing reliance on external systems.
⸻
THE LABOUR COST QUESTION
A key challenge often raised is Australia’s relatively high labour costs.
McIntyre proposes a model similar to apprenticeships:
•New entrants to the workforce begin on lower wages
•Over several years, wages increase as skills develop
•Industries gain cost competitiveness
•Workers gain long-term earning potential
This approach, he suggests, could help restore competitiveness in key sectors.
⸻
AFFORDABLE HOUSING AS PART OF THE SOLUTION
Extending the same framework, McIntyre suggests:
•Using government-owned land
•Deploying prefabricated modular housing
•Reducing regulatory and tax burdens on construction
•Delivering low-cost housing options
He argues this could support both:
•Housing affordability for Australians
•Accommodation for workers in essential industries
⸻
THE BIGGER DEBATE
At its core, this issue reflects a broader policy divide:
Should a country prioritise:
•Global integration and market efficiency
Or:
•Sovereignty, resilience, and self-sufficiency
Australia’s current fuel dependence suggests the former has dominated decision-making for decades.
⸻
A CROSSROADS MOMENT
McIntyre’s position is that global supply chains function effectively in stable conditions.
However, in periods of disruption, their weaknesses become evident.
Countries without sufficient internal capacity may face not just economic challenges, but strategic vulnerabilities.
⸻
FINAL THOUGHT
Australia has the resources.
It has the demand.
It has the capability.
The central question, McIntyre argues, is whether policy direction will shift toward prioritising national resilience.
Because a nation that cannot fuel itself places a critical part of its future in external hands.
And that, ultimately, is a strategic choice.
