Trump’s Mozambique LNG Gamble: A Billion-Dollar Powder Keg the White House Wants You To Ignore

The Wall Street Journal is begging Trump to walk away from a volatile LNG venture. The danger is bigger than anyone is admitting.

The smoke rises slowly in Cabo Delgado. It floats above a coastline that should be postcard blue, but instead carries the residue of burned out markets, ransacked homes, and military convoys that never return the same way twice.

In this region, even the wind knows the sound of insurgency.

Yet thousands of miles away in Washington, the Trump administration is weighing a decision that could tie the United States directly to this conflict: whether to continue backing a controversial liquefied natural gas mega project run by France’s TotalEnergies and financed through the U.S. Export Import Bank.

A project the conservative Wall Street Journal editorial board now describes as a “calamity waiting to happen” (Raw Story, 2025, p.1).

When the Wall Street Journal starts sounding like a human rights NGO, something is deeply wrong.

This is not just an energy investment.

This is a geopolitical tripwire sitting in one of the most unstable corridors on the planet.

And Trump is being told to walk away before it blows up in America’s face.

The Mozambique Corridor the Public Never Sees

Most Americans have never heard of Cabo Delgado. Fragile states rarely trend on social media. But inside intelligence circles, the region has become shorthand for a perfect storm: natural resources, insurgent expansion, fragile governance, foreign mercenaries, and multinational oil ambitions colliding in the same district.

TotalEnergies’ LNG project sits directly in the crosshairs.

According to the reporting, the region has been so unstable that Mozambique’s government previously enlisted the Wagner Group to handle security (Raw Story, 2025, p.2).

That detail alone would make most Western governments run.

Then the insurgency escalated.

TotalEnergies suspended operations in 2021 after coordinated attacks forced evacuations and halted construction. Armed convoys moved workers through hostile roads while entire villages were left to fend for themselves.

Soon after, a French human rights organization filed a criminal complaint alleging Mozambican soldiers securing the area committed war crimes. TotalEnergies was accused of complicity by association. The company denies all wrongdoing.

Still, the allegation refuses to disappear.

“The project is a calamity waiting to happen.”

(Raw Story, 2025, p.2).

When the Journal uses language this sharp, it signals that the financial and geopolitical risk has crossed the red line.

Why the WSJ Is Really Sounding the Alarm

The Wall Street Journal is not suddenly worried about human rights in Mozambique. Their audience is investors, financiers, and policymakers. If they are warning Trump away, it means the math is dangerous.

The British and Dutch governments have already abandoned the project. They did not bow out quietly. They ran.

Behind closed doors, analysts describe the venture as nearly uninsurable. The combination of insurgency, alleged war crimes, and political volatility makes the project radioactive for Western lenders.

Then comes the detail that reveals the real friction.

TotalEnergies CEO Patrick Pouyanné appears worried that Europe’s shift away from Russian gas could hurt the Mozambique project. He also suggested Trump’s push to reduce Russian LNG imports might increase prices in a way that distorts the market.

From the document:

Pouyanné has stated that if Trump is pushing to abandon Russian LNG quicker, it is because “somewhere he knows that it will boost prices” (Raw Story, 2025, p.3).

The Journal frames this as a strategic power play.

TotalEnergies wants Washington to absorb the risk while they collect the reward.

Then the editorial board asks the quiet question out loud:

“Why would Mr. Trump finance another one of the Frenchman’s dubious bets?”

(Raw Story, 2025, p.4).

In conservative editorial language, this is the equivalent of pounding a fist on the table.

The Hidden Battlefield of Global Energy Politics

This story is not limited to Mozambique. It is tied to a shifting global energy order.

Three forces are colliding:

Europe is trying to escape dependence on Russian gas.

The United States is trying to dominate global LNG exports.

TotalEnergies is trying to preserve its influence in a world racing toward renewables.

This creates a strategic tension.

Europe needs alternative suppliers.

The United States wants to be that supplier.

TotalEnergies wants control over a critical piece of that market.

Russia benefits from instability, because instability increases Europe’s anxiety and slows the transition.

Mozambique becomes the battleground.

The Journal is effectively telling Trump that he is stepping into a geopolitical contest over energy dominance.

The Intelligence Risk No One Is Speaking About

Here is the danger beneath the danger.

Cabo Delgado’s insurgency has ties to transnational extremist networks. The lines of allegiance shift. Funding sources shift. Local attacks can be triggered by global events.

Any American backed critical infrastructure facility inside that zone becomes a target.

If Washington continues financing the project, then:

Any attack on the site becomes a political crisis for the United States.

A hostage taking.

A bombing.

Contractors trapped during an evacuation.

A mercenary unit advancing into the vacuum.

This is exactly how regional conflicts broaden into international crises.

And the only reason the United States would be involved is because one administration agreed to finance a risky energy gamble that every other Western government walked away from.

What Trump Stands to Gain and Lose

On the surface, Trump sees an opportunity to:

Support LNG.

Support exports.

Show strength against Russia.

Back a large French ally.

But beneath the surface, the risks multiply.

This is not a stable region.

This is not a predictable state partner.

And this is not a project the American public will tolerate casualties for.

If the project collapses, the blame will not fall on TotalEnergies.

It will fall on the administration that kept writing checks.

Segue: The System Failure Beneath the Story

This entire situation exposes a deeper flaw in American foreign policy.

Washington often enters fragile states believing economic incentives can offset political instability. They cannot. They never have.

The pattern is always the same:

A multinational corporation stakes a claim.

A fragile state promises stability it cannot deliver.

Violence grows.

Western financing attempts to hold the investment together.

Civilians suffer.

The United States becomes entangled.

This is not just poor forecasting.

It is structural blindness.

The Wall Street Journal is not warning Trump out of moral concern. They are warning him because the strategic risk now outweighs the financial return.

That is the final stage before a project implodes.

Final Word

History does not always scream. Sometimes it whispers through editorials, warnings, and footnotes that only the attentive catch.

Right now, the whisper is clear.

The fires in Cabo Delgado are real.

The allegations in French courts are real.

The threat of insurgent escalation is real.

The geopolitical rivalry beneath the project is real.

And the risk of the United States stepping into an international crisis is real.

The Wall Street Journal sees the storm approaching.

The question is whether Washington will see it too.

If you believe in independent, fearless reporting, consider becoming a paid subscriber. It keeps work like this alive.

References

Raw Story. (2025). “Calamity waiting to happen”: WSJ begs Trump to back off massive “boondoggle”. https://www.rawstory.com/trump-mozambique/

WHAT TO READ: