I totally agree. I can’t believe anyone could have seriously thought Russia would sabotage their own infrastructure, yet this was the leading theory on mainstream news
The configuration of blowing up NS1 fully and NS2 half-way has quite a few upsides for Russia: getting out of contracts without voiding them, improving the internal political situation (in case anyone wants to create a coup and then start selling gas again) or sending a message (a norway-poland pipeline was opened just one day before NS was blown up)
I think it's unreasonable to believe that you could intentionally half-way blow up a pipeline. And the only reasonable conclusion here is that the intention was to blow all of it up.
Why would Russia want to even get out of those contracts? If Europe is willing to pay, they will gladly supply gas, as they have done for many many decades. Even at the peak of the cold war, they were reliably supplying gas to Western Germany for example. It is very lucrative for them. And in any case, why do contracts between Russia and Europe even matter at this point. Any party can just do whatever they want.
There is no point is "sending a message", it's very obvious that it is possible to blow up an underwater pipeline. Anyone worth sending a message to would have already known its possible.
The obvious real motivation here is to prevent any negotiation over re-opening the pipeline.
> Why would Russia want to even get out of those contracts? If Europe is willing to pay, they will gladly supply gas, as they have done for many many decades. Even at the peak of the cold war, they were reliably supplying gas to Western Germany for example. It is very lucrative for them. And in any case, why do contracts between Russia and Europe even matter at this point. Any party can just do whatever they want.
Then explain why Russia had already cut off the supply of gas for clearly spurious reasons. And why Russia has used shutting off gas as an economic weapon before, including against Georgia and Ukraine in the past.
I’m not convinced Gazprom would’ve done this to get out of penalties, but your statement is incorrect. Contracts still matter because this isn’t an all out existential war where nothing else matters. Relations will have to normalise at some point, and Gazprom is still selling to other countries and can’t show itself to them as an unreliable partner that doesn’t care about delivery contracts.
Sending a message is not just about demonstrating the capability, as you’ve focused on, but showing the willingness to actually do it.
Each pipeline consists of two strands that are some distance apart. So blowing them up separately is certainly possible. In the end those are 4 pipelines, they're just not all named separately.
Upsides for Russia? Really? Getting out of contracts? LOL!
Pretty sure those would be irrelevant given all the sanctions. Let’s check the upsides for Russia: losing $10 billion+ of investment, billions in future revenue, and ending Germany’s strategic dependence. And you think they care about “contracts”? Amazing.
https://fair.org/home/us-medias-intellectual-no-fly-zone-on-...
Can you stop the hyperbole?! Yes they definitely care about contracts, if they don't honour contracts even in the situation of sanctions confidence in doing business with them would plummet, also in Asia etc.. This is how the modern world works.
You notice that when Russia turned off the gas before, they never said, "because we want to screw you", but instead cited maintanance. If they could just turn off the tap without reason and contracts be damned, why would they do that?
War and acts of God render most contracts moot. It’s a silly argument. And plenty of countries (smartly) renege on contracts all the time for even less dramatic reasons and do not suffer long, if at all, in the international capital markets. IMF/World Bank are not as important as they used to be. Compared to China, they’re now bit players. This is how the modern world works.
Russia cited maintenance when turning off NS1 because they probably had maintenance to do that was difficult in a war zone. Also, NS1 traverses Ukraine, and they had previously accused Ukraine of siphoning.
You are thinking of the Soyuz or Brotherhood pipelines, which go via Ukraine (and there is a third option: the yamal pipeline that goes via Poland).
NS1 and NS2 go directly from Russia to Germany via the baltic sea, which Ukraine has no direct border with, so are nowhere close to any war zone.
The compressor station, which allegedly had technical issues, is located in mainland Russia (far far away from Ukraine).
Russia doesn’t own the pipeline. And they used the damage to Nordstream 1 as an excuse to demand that Germany accept supply through Nordstream 2. Russia had in any case turned off all supply via NS1 to Germany. So no real harm to Russia and strengthens their energy blackmail position.
While the pipeline is technically owned by some Swiss holding company, Russia still invested billions in its construction and will now lose billions more in lost revenue, not to mention German strategic dependence on Russia. The idea that there’s no real harm to Russia is patently absurd.
They literally destroyed their economy and wiped out decades of diplomacy and trust... and you can't believe they blew up a bit of a pipe to pressure the market and Germany?
I don't think you're seeing things in perspective and the scale of the events.
Pressure the market in what way that isn't accomplished by just turning the pipeline off without blowing it up?
And pressure Germany into what exactly? Think this one through. How does removing the possibility of re-opening the pipeline pressure Germany into anything from the point of view of the Russians?
What Russia would want to pressure Germany into is "stop your sanctions and we will sell you gas". A possibility removed by blowing up the pipeline.
The "Russia blew up the pipeline" idea makes absolutely no sense. And if there was any evidence to support it, you know that the whole of Western media would be shouting it from every rooftop.
But instead we have silence, and concerns over "national security"
Ok so I'll give you the context you seem to have forgotten: when the pipe was blown up Europe was in the market to acquire LNG... and they needed A LOT of gas.
When Russia closed the pipe, it rippled through the market, and made EU pay more for the LNG.
If that's not pressuring the market, I don't know what it is. On top of the increased pressure, they managed to make EU pay even more - on a WAR THAT RUSSIA NEEDS TO END ASAP.
> But instead we have silence, and concerns over "national security"
What good would it be to let everyone know Russia did it? Get people questioning: if this is an act of war? Why are we allowing Russia to attack our infrastructure? What will they attack next?
No one wants to go to war with Russia.
Plus, Russia will deny this anyway, like they denied the attack on the flight MH17, even after evidence proved it was done by Russia - we already knew it was them, but only now there was a verdict - since 2014 this has been investigated.
> The "Russia blew up the pipeline" idea makes absolutely no sense. And if there was any evidence to support it, you know that the whole of Western media would be shouting it from every rooftop. But instead we have silence, and concerns over "national security"
Indeed. With every day that goes by without NATO publicly publishing proof of Russia being the culprit, Russian responsibility seems less likely. If Russia did it, going public with that proof would be great for America/NATO and harmful to Russia.
>Indeed. With every day that goes by without NATO publicly publishing proof of Russia being the culprit, Russian responsibility seems less likely. If Russia did it, going public with that proof would be great for America/NATO and harmful to Russia.
Harmful to Russia?
Do you realize they're invading a country and stealing land? There's no more harm for Russia, they did it to themselves.
The countries that align with Russia have already done, the neutral ones don't care.
Destroyed their economy? The ruble is doing just fine. And it was the West that TRIED to destroy their economy. Tell me how pressuring the market and Germany is somehow a plausible theory?? If the pipeline is gone there is nothing more to negotiate about, which is exactly why the US blew it up (coincidentally while Russia and Germany were negotiating).
https://fair.org/home/us-medias-intellectual-no-fly-zone-on-...
Ruble is a controlled forex currency. You virtually can't sell rubles and exchange them to EUR or USD at the moment. Russian government imposed very strict regulation into buying foreign currencies and banks imposed heavy taxation (1% per month) for holding foreign currencies, forcing people into exchanging USD into RUB. Volume is down substantially as well.
It was a smart thing to do by Russia - it keeps ruble look strong. We'll see how long they can keep it up. Maybe in future we'll even read about it in books how to avoid currency depreciation.
Since the invasion he has made multiple diplomatically problematic misstatements that the state department had to walk back. Banking on American presidents’ “tough talk” will bankrupt you quickly. Given his cognitive state we can’t know, but why would he disclose this if it were actually on the todo list? It just doesn’t work that way.
But really, the question isn’t if we could or would, but if we did. Those are majorly different questions.
Isn’t it amazing how you get downvoted for bringing up obvious facts? The other striking thing about Biden’s declaration that the US would end Nordstream is that the German head of state was standing right next to him when he said it. Tells you everything you need to know about the relationship and sadly, the subservience of the German government.
It's just laughable at this point. You bring up a literal quote and link to the video, they say it was a misstatement. The mental gymnastics is impressive.
This makes no sense. Ukraine is going to magically conjure the gas to put in NS1 for delivery to Europe? Also, you do realize that NS2 isn’t actually owned by Russia? I doubt the Swiss holding company is going to let the “EU court” confiscate its property, damaged or not.
It's a classic. Attack yourself and blame the other guy. This is how wars often start. The problem is that these cases are purely speculative, when executed right.
It's obvious that's what Russia would do. Between their constant shelling of their own positions and launching missiles into Poland to trigger Article 5, they're clearly completely suicidal.
LOL— shelling their own positions? Like the nuclear plant they’re occupying? Wow, the Russiagate brain rot is worse than I thought. And truly embarrassing that you’re still pushing the line that Russia launched the missiles into Poland.
