For decades, “energy independence” has been one of America’s strongest political one-liners. Presidents on both sides of the aisle have invoked it, fused it into campaign ads, and treated it as an achievable and patriotic idea. This idea is wrapped around the promise that America can stand apart from global uncertainty by running on its own bountiful resources, immune to worldwide instability and to the control of oil-rich autocracies. 

Here is the uncomfortable truth: energy independence is a complete myth. Clinging to it is stopping the U.S. from creating the resilient energy system our economy and national security demand. The real focus of policy should be opening market access, modernizing regulations, and providing consumer choice to ensure secure, affordable energy. 

The idea of energy independence misunderstands how energy actually works in the 21st century. The price of oil is set on global markets, not national ones. A conflict in the Middle East or a refinery outage in Asia immediately impacts American gas prices, regardless of how many barrels we drill here. It should be noted, however, that more domestic production and diversified supplies can better insulate consumers from significant supply shocks and price spikes.

Even our booming domestic natural gas production is closely connected to international demand through natural gas markets. Wind and solar technologies, which play a significant role in the U.S. clean energy mix, rely heavily on resources abroad. 

The United States is not isolated, and pretending we can be (or should be) is strategically naïve.

Thankfully, there is a better path forward, one that aligns with the realities of today’s energy landscape. Instead of pursuing the myth of “independence,” we should pursue energy resilience. 

Resilience acknowledges that interdependence is inevitable, but vulnerability is optional. It changes the focus from trying to isolate ourselves from global markets to strengthening our ability to absorb and pivot during times of disruption. That means diversifying supply chains instead of over-relying on a single source for crucial resources. It means growing manufacturing capacity here in the U.S to ensure essential technologies don’t bottleneck overseas. It also means investing in flexible energy systems that can handle disruption, whether climatic, political, or economic. 

Let’s be honest: resilience isn’t as glamorous as independence, nor does it sound exciting in a stump speech. It requires the U.S. to coordinate with allies, acknowledge uncomfortable tradeoffs, and create a long-term industrial strategy. Like most worthwhile endeavors, this is both realistic and achievable. It also aligns with how energy markets operate.

>>>READ: Taking the Politics Out of Permitting Reform

The great news is that the U.S. has already started to move in this direction, although somewhat imbalanced. America’s growth as the leading oil and gas producer, recent investments in clean energy production, efforts to onshore part of the supply chain, and investments in  grid modernization all point to an emerging idea: security comes from extensive collaboration, not isolation.  

What’s needed now is the political will and courage to replace a feel-good slogan with a more sober, realistic, and forward-looking vision. While energy independence sounds catchy, resilience is what will keep the lights on and the economy stable amid evolving global pressures. 

If America wants to lead in the global energy space rather than be stifled by it, we must stop asking how to stand isolated and start asking how to stand firm and resilient. 

The views and opinions expressed are those of the author’s and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of C3.