Trump vindicated as OPEC faces collapse following UAE departure 81%

By Simon Constable0%

5/15/2026, 5:40:53 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 30 faulty reasoning types, including Hasty Generalization, Appeal to Authority, and Negativity Bias, with Post Hoc (False Cause) as the most egregious example at 33.1% saturation with 333 hits. Analysis detected 2,630 faulty-reasoning hits from 1,005 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 73% and a BS Rank of 81% (4,035 of 21,204 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 81.00% of the article peer group.

The price of gasoline is set to drop as the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) appears poised to collapse, experts predict. 
OPEC has long kept crude oil prices higher than they would otherwise be. 
If this pans out, it will be a major victory for the Trump administration, which is resetting global energy markets. 
The news of a probable end of the oil cartel also vindicates President Donald Trump, who has previously said OPEC is "ripping off the rest of the world." 
For a long time, the president has led a pressure campaign against OPEC, which has vast crude oil reserves that could easily be pumped. 
But the organization restricts the number of barrels of oil that each country may pump each day. 
That keeps gasoline prices elevated across the U.S. and much of the rest of the world. 
Phil Flynn, senior market analyst at The PRICE Futures Group and a FOX Business contributor said, "Over time, the breakup of the cartel should cause gas prices to fall. 
With more player pricing, oil only being contained by market forces should lead to an ounce of supply and lower prices. 
Competition is good as it lowers prices and collusion by producers raises prices." 
The poster child for the possible beginning of the end of OPEC came in late April when the United Arab Emirates (UAE) announced it would quit OPEC and OPEC+ on May 1. 
Flynn linked the U.S.-Israel war with Iran as a historic marker. 
"I think that is a real possibility and more OPEC countries want to control their own destiny. 
In fact, when we look back at one of the strategic victories from Operation Epic Fury, it is that it has changed the face of the OPEC cartel forever and shifted energy dominance from the cartel back into our hemisphere. 
The UAE was getting tired of playing second fiddle to Saudi Arabia, the de facto leader of the cartel. 
The UEA wants to assert its leadership and has a competitive goal to not only increase oil production in the long term, but it wants to assert itself as the leader of the region." 
The simple act of the UAE quitting the cartel led immediately to OPEC losing out in a big way. 
"[The UAE’s] departure removes both production weight and institutional credibility, and that's got to be a concern to Saudi Arabia and others who remain," says Elaine Dezenski, head of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies' (FDD) center on economic and financial power. 
"I think we're now seeing one of the final nails in the coffin for OPEC. 
We're seeing alignment from the UAE towards the U.S., which is, I think, part of a broader economic statecraft." 
Some analysts say there is also a high likelihood that the UAE’s decision to leave OPEC could trigger a domino effect. 
Other OPEC countries will have seen the news that the UAE will be able to increase their daily production from slightly more than three million barrels a day to five million next year. 
That gain in production could easily prompt countries such as Iraq to jump ship, as they would then be free to pump as much oil as they can and need rather than be constrained by OPEC quotas. 
Not everyone sees the cartel's end. 
"OPEC+ is not built around noise. 
It is built around capacity, credibility, and coordination," Salman Al-Ansari, a Saudi geopolitical analyst, told FOX Business. 
"On these fronts, the UAE is not among the most decisive players in the group. 
Politically, this appears less like a major economic rupture and more like a symbolic move to signal leverage and independence. 
But symbolism does not always translate into influence." 
Al-Ansari doesn't foresee a collapse of OPEC. 
"I believe OPEC+ can continue to function and thrive," he said. 
"The institution has managed internal differences before, and its strength ultimately depends on disciplined coordination rather than political signaling." 
But there’s an additional aspect to OPEC's potential downfall. 
"Cartels have a long history of working efficiently for a while and then collapsing," Pete Earle, director of economics and economic freedom at the American Institute for Economic Research, told FOX Business. 
The reason for that is that members of oil cartels have an incentive to produce more fuel than their OPEC production quota. 
And, the cheating can ultimately lead to a breakdown of the organization, he said. 
There are some things that will be different if OPEC disappears. 
"I don't know whether American energy producers, oil producers, will feel happy about a lower oil price," said Bernard Haykel, a senior fellow at FDD. 
That said, major American energy companies are highly innovative at adapting to economic changes. 
They have done so for many decades, so lower prices might not pose a significant challenge. 
Earle also said that while oil prices will come down without OPEC, they will be more volatile, making for a roller-coaster ride for anyone buying gasoline. 
However, there are ways for energy companies to use sophisticated financial derivatives to smooth some of the volatility. 
Earle said some countries rely heavily on oil revenues, and falling prices might lead to unintended consequences. 
"Lower, less stable prices that would possibly translate into domestic instability." 
He continued, "Iraq and Nigeria would probably be impacted by instability." 
Whatever happens to OPEC, there is some good news on the horizon. 
"We're likely to see lower prices in the future. 
I'm not talking now or in six months, but let's say a year from now, once things get back to normal, you'll see a much lower price because of this UAE decision," Haykel said. 
Flynn, a FOX Business contributor, said, "OPEC is not only on life support, it is dead in the traditional sense. 
This is no longer your daddy’s OPEC and oil politics have changed forever because of what has happened since Operation Epic Fury. 
Still, as long as Saudi and Russia, their non-OPEC competitor, stay together, they are still a force that cannot be ignored." 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 11.2%Simon Constable: 8.1%FoxBusiness: 4.4%Confirmation Bias11.2%This article: 0.0%Simon Constable: 0.0%FoxBusiness: 3.5%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 14.3%Simon Constable: 4.2%FoxBusiness: 4.1%Availability Heuristic14.3%This article: 6.6%Simon Constable: 2.5%FoxBusiness: 1.1%Representativeness Heuristic6.6%This article: 9.5%Simon Constable: 3.1%FoxBusiness: 0.7%Hindsight Bias9.5%This article: 10.6%Simon Constable: 11.9%FoxBusiness: 3.7%Overconfidence Bias10.6%This article: 8.9%Simon Constable: 7.4%FoxBusiness: 13.0%Framing Effect8.9%This article: 0.0%Simon Constable: 0.0%FoxBusiness: 1.5%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 2.1%Simon Constable: 0.3%FoxBusiness: 1.1%Status Quo Bias2.1%This article: 0.0%Simon Constable: 0.0%FoxBusiness: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 13.6%Simon Constable: 7.7%FoxBusiness: 8.8%Optimism Bias13.6%This article: 4.9%Simon Constable: 1.6%FoxBusiness: 2.0%Pessimism Bias4.9%This article: 14.5%Simon Constable: 2.9%FoxBusiness: 7.8%Negativity Bias14.5%This article: 9.7%Simon Constable: 2.4%FoxBusiness: 4.5%Self-Serving Bias9.7%This article: 7.7%Simon Constable: 1.8%FoxBusiness: 0.9%Fundamental Attribution Error7.7%This article: 0.0%Simon Constable: 0.2%FoxBusiness: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Simon Constable: 2.3%FoxBusiness: 1.7%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Simon Constable: 0.0%FoxBusiness: 0.8%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 2.7%Simon Constable: 3.1%FoxBusiness: 3.9%Halo Effect2.7%This article: 0.0%Simon Constable: 0.0%FoxBusiness: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Simon Constable: 0.0%FoxBusiness: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 5.5%Simon Constable: 1.4%FoxBusiness: 2.3%Recency Bias5.5%This article: 0.0%Simon Constable: 0.7%FoxBusiness: 0.4%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Simon Constable: 0.0%FoxBusiness: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Simon Constable: 0.4%FoxBusiness: 0.8%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Simon Constable: 0.0%FoxBusiness: 0.4%Straw Man0.0%This article: 16.7%Simon Constable: 8.0%FoxBusiness: 7.2%Appeal to Authority16.7%This article: 2.1%Simon Constable: 0.3%FoxBusiness: 1.6%False Dilemma2.1%This article: 10.9%Simon Constable: 4.2%FoxBusiness: 1.2%Slippery Slope10.9%This article: 0.0%Simon Constable: 0.3%FoxBusiness: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 17.4%Simon Constable: 12.3%FoxBusiness: 6.3%Hasty Generalization17.4%This article: 1.1%Simon Constable: 0.3%FoxBusiness: 0.8%Red Herring1.1%This article: 0.0%Simon Constable: 0.2%FoxBusiness: 1.2%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 1.2%Simon Constable: 2.8%FoxBusiness: 6.1%Appeal to Emotion1.2%This article: 5.9%Simon Constable: 1.0%FoxBusiness: 1.2%Begging the Question5.9%This article: 33.1%Simon Constable: 12.8%FoxBusiness: 4.4%Post Hoc (False Cause)33.1%This article: 0.0%Simon Constable: 0.0%FoxBusiness: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Simon Constable: 0.0%FoxBusiness: 0.4%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 1.3%Simon Constable: 0.2%FoxBusiness: 0.1%Appeal to Nature1.3%This article: 1.6%Simon Constable: 1.0%FoxBusiness: 0.3%Composition/Division1.6%This article: 9.9%Simon Constable: 1.7%FoxBusiness: 2.4%Anecdotal9.9%This article: 0.0%Simon Constable: 0.0%FoxBusiness: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 11.9%Simon Constable: 3.2%FoxBusiness: 1.9%Ambiguity (Equivocation)11.9%This article: 0.0%Simon Constable: 0.0%FoxBusiness: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Simon Constable: 0.0%FoxBusiness: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Simon Constable: 0.0%FoxBusiness: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Simon Constable: 0.0%FoxBusiness: 0.3%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Simon Constable: 0.0%FoxBusiness: 0.2%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Simon Constable: 1.2%FoxBusiness: 1.8%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 2.9%Simon Constable: 2.2%FoxBusiness: 1.4%Quote-first Misdirection2.9%This article: 11.9%Simon Constable: 5.2%FoxBusiness: 4.1%Biased Writer Voice11.9%This article: 4.0%Simon Constable: 1.3%FoxBusiness: 1.7%Indoctrination4.0%This article: 0.0%Simon Constable: 0.0%FoxBusiness: 0.1%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 8.1%Simon Constable: 7.7%FoxBusiness: 2.1%Politically Right Leaning Bias8.1%This article: 0.0%Simon Constable: 0.0%FoxBusiness: 4.4%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

1005 words analyzed.

Speakers

5speakers51%attributed speech491writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 9 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 28 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coveragePhil Flynn • 29 words • 100.0% coveragePhil Flynn • 21 words • 0.0% coveragePhil Flynn • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 32 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coveragePhil Flynn • 17 words • 0.0% coveragePhil Flynn • 40 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 34 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 100.0% coverageElaine Dezenski • 43 words • 0.0% coverageElaine Dezenski • 15 words • 0.0% coverageElaine Dezenski • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 33 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 37 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageSalman Al-Ansari • 6 words • 0.0% coverageSalman Al-Ansari • 17 words • 0.0% coverageSalman Al-Ansari • 15 words • 0.0% coverageSalman Al-Ansari • 20 words • 0.0% coverageSalman Al-Ansari • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageSalman Al-Ansari • 11 words • 0.0% coverageSalman Al-Ansari • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coveragePete Earle • 32 words • 0.0% coveragePete Earle • 22 words • 0.0% coveragePete Earle • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageBernard Haykel • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coveragePete Earle • 11 words • 0.0% coveragePete Earle • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 100.0% coverageBernard Haykel • 9 words • 0.0% coverageBernard Haykel • 34 words • 0.0% coveragePhil Flynn • 20 words • 0.0% coveragePhil Flynn • 22 words • 0.0% coveragePhil Flynn • 21 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Phil Flynn

100%flagged-word coverage
183 attributed words36% of attributed speech89% writer coverage
0%12.5%25.0%Biased Writer Voice-24.4 ptsWriter: 24.4%Phil Flynn: 0.0%0.0%Indoctrination+21.9 ptsWriter: 0.0%Phil Flynn: 21.9%21.9%Politically Right Leaning -16.5 ptsWriter: 16.5%Phil Flynn: 0.0%0.0%Quote-first Misdirection+15.8 ptsWriter: 0.0%Phil Flynn: 15.8%15.8%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.