When oil becomes the state’s ideology

“Oil is not a background factor. It is the foundation. You cannot understand the Russian Empire, the Soviet Union or today’s petrostates without understanding the role of oil – economically, politically, ideologically and culturally,” says Irina Seits, a researcher in aesthetics at Södertörn University.
For more than a century, oil has been the driving force behind the region’s industrialisation, technological development and geopolitical power. But it has also become something more than this: a symbol of modernity, progress and national identity. This transformation, from raw material to ideology, is the focus of a new research project.

Together with Maria Engström, a professor of Russian at Uppsala University, Seits is leading the research project Weaponizing Visual Cultures: Anti‑Environmentalism and Neo‑Extractivism in Contemporary Petrostates. The project is examining how, in contemporary Russia and Azerbaijan, oil and gas are used as cultural and political tools through images, exhibitions and aesthetic environments.

“We ask ourselves what role oil and fossil fuels play in the contemporary world, and why they continue to be taken for granted in an era of climate crisis. As cultural researchers, our focus is not primarily energy policy, but on how oil is depicted visually – in art, architecture, exhibitions and popular culture,” she says.

What is a petrostate?

Petrostate is term used to describe countries whose economies are very dependent on oil and gas production. Often, around ten per cent or more of GDP is directly linked to the sector, which is also frequently subsidised by the state. Iran and Venezuela are well-known examples. Russia and Azerbaijan are two of the most prominent oil-producing states in the Baltic Sea and Caucasus regions.

“That is also why we chose those countries. They are leading petrostates in the region and were both part of the Soviet Union. Also, since 2010, we have also seen a clearly illiberal trend in both countries, a move towards greater authoritarianism,” says Seits.

At the same time, both countries have a long history as oil producers. As far back as the late 19th century, Baku’s oil fields were of vital importance to the Russian Empire, and later to the Soviet Union’s industrialisation.

“Oil was the motor for modernity. It drove technological development, industrial expansion and political power. And it has never really left that role,” she says.

A changing geopolitical landscape

Although oil has long been fundamental, the geopolitical conditions that surround it have changed rapidly over the last decade. In Russia’s case, this was particularly clear following the annexation of Crimea in 2014, and even more so after the full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022. The country has increasingly turned away from the West, instead deepening relations with China and Iran.

Azerbaijan has a different, more balanced position.

“Azerbaijan lies at the crossroads of all the oil routes, north to south and east to west. It has to strike a balance between Russia and the East, and its geopolitical role has grown enormously,” says Seits.

In both cases, this creates a need for powerful narratives about stability, sovereignty and optimism – narratives that are conveyed not only through official policy, but also through culture.

The exhibition as an ideological space

Russia has a long tradition of using exhibitions as ideological spaces. During the Soviet era, the vast VDNKh complex in Moscow, construction of which began during Stalin’s industrialisation efforts in 1935, was a model of the state; visitors could move between pavilions that represented different republics and industries, literally walking through the state’s image of itself.

Following the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, the area fell into disrepair and was used as a market. However, a major restoration project began in the 2010s and Soviet symbols also began to reappear more clearly in public spaces, particularly after 2014.

“When the question of a new Russian national identity began to take shape in the 2000s, attention turned to VDNKh. It was already charged with history, memories and symbolism,” she says.

Gazprom’s pavilion – concentrated petro-aesthetics

It was not by chance that the state-run mega-exhibition “Russia – Forum for the Future” opened at VDNKh on 4 November 2023, Russia’s National Unity Day. The exhibition ran for nine months and attracted around 18.5 million visitors, making it the most visited exhibition in modern Russian history.

The exhibition presented Russia’s 89 regions, including the occupied territories in Ukraine, as integral parts of a shared future. The war was largely invisible. Instead, stories about technology, nature, cultural diversity and future opportunities were dominant. Delegations from around 120 countries were invited, to demonstrate Russia was not as isolated as the Western media often portrayed it.

Within this framework, the energy companies’ pavilions were particularly important, with Gazprom’s pavilion making the strongest impression on Seits.

“You just got swept along. There was no space for doubt. Visitors were not invited to reflect on our dependence on fossil fuels, but rather to feel at home with it.”

The pavilion was designed as a closed, high-tech capsule through which visitors were guided along a set route. The experience was physical and total. Oil and gas were portrayed as the foundation of everything: the economy, technology, prosperity and even the green transition.

“It was an almost claustrophobic experience. You couldn’t escape, you couldn’t choose your own path. Everything was choreographed. You became part of an oil and gas civilisation that took care of everything,” she says.

Culture as a weapon

This is context in which the project’s concept of “weaponisation” is significant.

“Here, culture is more than a tool. A tool can be used for anything, but a weapon is targeted. The exhibitions, the art and the visual narratives have been deliberately aimed at Western environmental policy, at demands for the rapid phasing out of fossil fuels, and at a particular vision of the future,” she says.

In these visual narratives, oil is portrayed as the foundation of national sovereignty, security and resilience. It is not described as an obstacle to the green transition, but as a prerequisite.

“This is a kind of positive neo‑extractivism. Extraction is not regarded as a problem, but as something necessary and fundamentally good. Oil is said to support welfare, culture and green initiatives, which is a very powerful narrative.”

According to Seits, this is precisely why aesthetic analysis is crucial.

“Economic and political analyses are not enough. To understand why fossil fuel dependency persists, despite the climate crisis, we must also read the pictures - how the future is portrayed, what is shown and what is left out.”