…and Just Like That, the Nord Stream Pipelines Went Kaboom!

 

Last night, the twin pipelines supplying Russian natural gas to Germany blew up.  Specifically, they were both breached below the surface of the Baltic Sea, near Danish and Swedish territorial waters.  Almost certainly sabotage, based both on the time coincidence, and a Swedish seismologist’s estimate that at least 100kg of explosive was used.

This sabotage was not a trivial exercise.  It would presumably require a ROV, large underwater drone and/or a submarine to place the charges accurately.  There’s a limited supply of such equipment and expertise. And it would likely require a large enough team that it will eventually leak, even if there’s no obvious forensic information to be gathered.

Qui bono?  Certainly Ukraine. Russia’s ability to use energy blackmail against Germany in particular and Europe in general has been eliminated at a stroke. But they are notably short of a navy and the required equipment and experts.

By the same token, unlikely to be official Russian actions. Putin’s ability to turn the tap on and off at will was just eliminated.  Much is being made by the fact that it happened the same day a new gas pipeline from Scandinavia to the mainland was opened, but you don’t generally threaten your enemy’s asset by destroying your own.

But Russia does have the necessary equipment and expertise, so there’s a chance that a military faction that wants to get rid of Putin but has no way to directly confront him would comprise his negotiating position in a reversible fashion (pipelines can be repaired).

After that, the circle gets pretty wide. The US certainly has the required abilities, as likely do the UK, France, and a few others.  Any pipeline or marine salvage company probably also could pull it off in a pinch, but keeping that secret would be hard, I’d think.

So the strategic background to Ukraine vs. Russia just shifted dramatically, and we don’t yet know who or why.

Published in Foreign Policy
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 97 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. MiMac Thatcher
    MiMac
    @MiMac

    DrewInWisconsin, Oik (View Comment):

    MiMac (View Comment):

    You need to double up on the tin foil- never been paid a dollar by Pfizer ( altho I would be surprised if a stock fund I am invested in didn’t have Pfizer shares).

    I don’t know what I did to piss you off. I never peed in your Cheerios, but it’s clear you hate me. Probably because I voted for Donald Trump. Get over yourself.

    Voted for Donald as well-follow your own advice & Get over yourself. My only problem with you is I refuse to allow conspiracy nuts dominate the conservative web- we deserve better. And I love my country, unlike others.

    • #61
  2. Zafar Member
    Zafar
    @Zafar

    DrewInWisconsin, Oik (View Comment):
    I never peed in your Cheerios

    Those were Cheerios. *trombone sound*

    • #62
  3. Old Bathos Member
    Old Bathos
    @OldBathos

    Gentlemen:

    We targeted ultra-MAGAs should cherish common ground. I will eat those pissed-on Cheerios for the team if necessary. Try to disagree with grace. What would Wm Buckley do?

     

    • #63
  4. DrewInWisconsin, Oik Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Oik
    @DrewInWisconsin

    MiMac (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Oik (View Comment):

    MiMac (View Comment):

    You need to double up on the tin foil- never been paid a dollar by Pfizer ( altho I would be surprised if a stock fund I am invested in didn’t have Pfizer shares).

    I don’t know what I did to piss you off. I never peed in your Cheerios, but it’s clear you hate me. Probably because I voted for Donald Trump. Get over yourself.

    Voted for Donald as well-follow your own advice & Get over yourself. My only problem with you is I refuse to allow conspiracy nuts dominate the conservative web- we deserve better. And I love my country, unlike others.

    Oh, I’m a conspiracy nut because I don’t believe the bizarre conspiracy theory that Putin blew up his own pipelines.

    I see.

    • #64
  5. Joseph Stanko Coolidge
    Joseph Stanko
    @JosephStanko

    Old Bathos (View Comment):
    What would Wm Buckley do?

    Call him a q***r and sock him in the face?

    • #65
  6. Bishop Wash Member
    Bishop Wash
    @BishopWash

    Joseph Stanko (View Comment):

    Old Bathos (View Comment):
    What would Wm Buckley do?

    Call him a q***r and sock him in the face?

    That’s how you know someone knows a person’s full body of work. Just like an answer to What Would Jesus Do can be knock over tables and whip people.

    • #66
  7. OccupantCDN Coolidge
    OccupantCDN
    @OccupantCDN

    Zafar (View Comment):

    OccupantCDN (View Comment):
    This also another reason to disdain Justine Trudeau. The German Ambassador to Canada asked the Canadian government to license LNG ports so that Canadian natural gas could be exported to Europe by tanker… Trudeau replied that he didnt see the business case for permitting such exports.

    https://www.iisd.org/articles/deep-dive/canadian-lng-not-eu-energy-crisis-solution

    Canada has no ready liquefied natural gas export infrastructure, and it will take at least 3 years before new projects come online.

    Dependence on Russian gas supplies has the EU looking for supplies to fill immediate needs before winter 2022.

    Due to climate commitments and energy security concerns, Europe is accelerating its plans to reduce gas use by ramping up energy efficiency and the use of renewable energy sources. While there may be demand for some fossil fuels, markets like Norway are more logical to fill immediate needs.

    This results in a fundamental mismatch with Canadian supply opportunities. Canada cannot ramp up supply before 2025, while Europe’s energy needs will largely be resolved by that time.

    High prices and energy security concerns, combined with climate commitments, suggest that new Canadian liquefied natural gas infrastructure would be at risk of becoming stranded.

    He’s Canada’s PM, not Germany’s.

    Yes yes … I know these facts… What Justine Trudeau was getting at – is that he wanted to end the oil business not develop new markets for them – That was the business case he didnt want to make.

    In a pinch we could use something like these:

    https://files.chartindustries.com/14732510_LNG_ISO.pdf

    While its less than ideal – its something that could get gas to Europe now that they need it. Without building a massive LNG port

    • #67
  8. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    OccupantCDN (View Comment):

    Zafar (View Comment):

    OccupantCDN (View Comment):
    This also another reason to disdain Justine Trudeau. The German Ambassador to Canada asked the Canadian government to license LNG ports so that Canadian natural gas could be exported to Europe by tanker… Trudeau replied that he didnt see the business case for permitting such exports.

    https://www.iisd.org/articles/deep-dive/canadian-lng-not-eu-energy-crisis-solution

    Canada has no ready liquefied natural gas export infrastructure, and it will take at least 3 years before new projects come online.

    Dependence on Russian gas supplies has the EU looking for supplies to fill immediate needs before winter 2022.

    Due to climate commitments and energy security concerns, Europe is accelerating its plans to reduce gas use by ramping up energy efficiency and the use of renewable energy sources. While there may be demand for some fossil fuels, markets like Norway are more logical to fill immediate needs.

    This results in a fundamental mismatch with Canadian supply opportunities. Canada cannot ramp up supply before 2025, while Europe’s energy needs will largely be resolved by that time.

    High prices and energy security concerns, combined with climate commitments, suggest that new Canadian liquefied natural gas infrastructure would be at risk of becoming stranded.

    He’s Canada’s PM, not Germany’s.

    Yes yes … I know these facts… What Justine Trudeau was getting at – is that he wanted to end the oil business not develop new markets for them – That was the business case he didnt want to make.

    In a pinch we could use something like these:

    https://files.chartindustries.com/14732510_LNG_ISO.pdf

    While its less than ideal – its something that could get gas to Europe now that they need it. Without building a massive LNG port

    We could already be – and were in the past – shipping LNG to Europe, before FJB.

    • #68
  9. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    Old Bathos (View Comment):

    Gentlemen:

    We targeted ultra-MAGAs should cherish common ground. I will eat those pissed-on Cheerios for the team if necessary. Try to disagree with grace. What would Wm Buckley do?

    Can’t you just substitute mare’s sweat?

    • #69
  10. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Flicker (View Comment):

    Old Bathos (View Comment):

    Gentlemen:

    We targeted ultra-MAGAs should cherish common ground. I will eat those pissed-on Cheerios for the team if necessary. Try to disagree with grace. What would Wm Buckley do?

    Can’t you just substitute mare’s sweat?

    I’ve seen that movie!

    • #70
  11. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):

    Old Bathos (View Comment):

    Gentlemen:

    We targeted ultra-MAGAs should cherish common ground. I will eat those pissed-on Cheerios for the team if necessary. Try to disagree with grace. What would Wm Buckley do?

    Can’t you just substitute mare’s sweat?

    I’ve seen that movie!

    Oh.  Then you know the secret that it causes a sudden unexpected comatose state.  But at least it’s not pee.

    • #71
  12. Locke On Member
    Locke On
    @LockeOn

    kedavis (View Comment):

    In a pinch we could use something like these:

    https://files.chartindustries.com/14732510_LNG_ISO.pdf

    While its less than ideal – its something that could get gas to Europe now that they need it. Without building a massive LNG port

    I’m trying to imagine filling and loading a whole container ship with these, and then unloading and draining at the other end. Logistics nightmare. Looks like something that would make sense for shipping to remote locations, but as a bulk tanker substitute….

    • #72
  13. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    Locke On (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    In a pinch we could use something like these:

    https://files.chartindustries.com/14732510_LNG_ISO.pdf

    While its less than ideal – its something that could get gas to Europe now that they need it. Without building a massive LNG port

    I’m trying to imagine filling and loading a whole container ship with these, and then unloading and draining at the other end. Logistics nightmare. Looks like something that would make sense for shipping to remote locations, but as a bulk tanker substitute….

    But for transporting LNG by sea to ports that don’t have bulk off-loading technology in place, they may need a substitute — any substitute.

    • #73
  14. Chris O Coolidge
    Chris O
    @ChrisO

    Raxxalan (View Comment):

    Zafar (View Comment):

    Joseph Stanko (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Oik (View Comment):

    EJHill+ (View Comment):

    I don’t understand the point of this. Are we to assume the US sabotaged a pipeline so that it could not carry gas that Putin is not putting into the pipeline and that he’s already not selling to Western Europe?

    Yeah, . . . this was my first thought. Not that the U.S. was behind it, but why take out a pipeline that is already shut down by Russia in an attempt to freeze out Europe?

    To make sure it’s harder for it to go back online?

    That was my first thought. If Europe gets desperate enough this winter, they could’ve cut a deal with Putin to turn the gas back on. This removes that temptation and thus gives Putin less leverage until the pipeline is repaired.

    Sometimes you just have remind ‘some people’ who won WWII…

    The Russians?

    De Gaulle. He said so (probably).

    • #74
  15. Chris O Coolidge
    Chris O
    @ChrisO

    kedavis (View Comment):
    We could already be – and were in the past – shipping LNG to Europe, before FJB.

    Germany reactivated one major terminal and is in process on converting two more. Can’t remember where I saw it, but they’ve been on it for some weeks now (hmmmmmm!). 

    • #75
  16. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Chris O (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):
    We could already be – and were in the past – shipping LNG to Europe, before FJB.

    Germany reactivated one major terminal and is in process on converting two more. Can’t remember where I saw it, but they’ve been on it for some weeks now (hmmmmmm!).

    Too bad FJB doesn’t want us to be exporting to them.

    • #76
  17. DrewInWisconsin, Oik Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Oik
    @DrewInWisconsin

    That evil, demon-controlled John Brennan* says that Russia did it.

    BRENNAN: Well, I think all the signs point to some type of sabotage. These pipelines are only in about 200 feet or so of water and Russia does have an undersea capability to — that would easily lay explosive devices by those pipelines. And I do think it’s a signal to Europe that Russia could reach beyond Ukraine’s borders.

    So, who knows what he might be planning next, but I think this is clearly an act of sabotage of some sort and Russia is certainly the most likely suspect.

    KEILAR: Why blow up their own pipelines if they can obviously just cut off the gas flowing from them?

    BRENNAN: Well, there’s been no gas flowing through those pipelines, although there is some gas that’s been pent up in them. That’s why we’ve cut the methane release. But there’s also pipelines that are going to Europe that are bringing gas from Norway. And so, it won’t take much if Russia decides to go after the other pipelines that are bringing gas into Europe.

    So I think this might be, again, a sign that Russia is intent on doing whatever it believes it needs to do or to weaken European resolve. But I think this might be just the first salvo of some additional things that might be coming toward Europe.

    Which means that the U.S. probably did it.


    * Known perjurer and all around vile bucket of excrement who should be locked away for what remains of his life.
    • #77
  18. OccupantCDN Coolidge
    OccupantCDN
    @OccupantCDN

    Chris O (View Comment):
    De Gaulle. He said so (probably).

    I believe it.

    De Gaulle was an ingrate. Thousands of allied troops died to free his country from the Nazis, but as soon as the war was over, he kicked the allies out.

    • #78
  19. BDB Inactive
    BDB
    @BDB

    OccupantCDN (View Comment):

    Chris O (View Comment):
    De Gaulle. He said so (probably).

    I believe it.

    De Gaulle was an ingrate. Thousands of allied troops died to free his country from the Nazis, but as soon as the war was over, he kicked the allies out.

    “Shall we take our dead as well?”

    • #79
  20. OccupantCDN Coolidge
    OccupantCDN
    @OccupantCDN

    Glenn Greenwald is on it:

    • #80
  21. Joseph Stanko Coolidge
    Joseph Stanko
    @JosephStanko

    I found this analysis by Noah Carl on the Daily Sceptic thorough and fair.  His conclusion:

    I don’t know who attacked the pipelines, and nor does anyone else. But if I had to guess: I’d say there’s a 10% chance it was Russia, a 20% chance it was America, a 30% chance it was Poland, and a 40% chance it was Ukraine.

    • #81
  22. Zafar Member
    Zafar
    @Zafar

    Joseph Stanko (View Comment):

    I found this analysis by Noah Carl on the Daily Sceptic thorough and fair. His conclusion:

    I don’t know who attacked the pipelines, and nor does anyone else. But if I had to guess: I’d say there’s a 10% chance it was Russia, a 20% chance it was America, a 30% chance it was Poland, and a 40% chance it was Ukraine.

    As if Ukraine or Poland would (or even could) do anything without US oversight and approval.

    Plus from the article:

    Now, readers will be aware that I’m generally sceptical of U.S. foreign policy. But if I had to put my money on it, I’d say this wasn’t the Americans. I could be wrong, of course. But it just doesn’t seem like their style.

    Not their style? It’s not persuasive, given the cui bono.

    What I’m getting is that many Americans find it difficult to believe that their country would push an ally in Europe under the bus in order to win a strategic advantage.

    • #82
  23. DrewInWisconsin, Oik Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Oik
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Zafar (View Comment):
    What I’m getting is that many Americans find it difficult to believe that their country would push an ally in Europe under the bus in order to win a strategic advantage.

    Given the current administration, I have no trouble believing it.

    That’s what I can’t understand — the same people who understand that the Biden administration’s domestic policy is a horrific shambles seem to think their foreign policy is sunshine and daisies.

    • #83
  24. Joseph Stanko Coolidge
    Joseph Stanko
    @JosephStanko

    Zafar (View Comment):
    What I’m getting is that many Americans find it difficult to believe that their country would push an ally in Europe under the bus in order to win a strategic advantage.

    I believe Noah Carl is British.

    • #84
  25. Zafar Member
    Zafar
    @Zafar

    DrewInWisconsin, Oik (View Comment):

    Zafar (View Comment):
    What I’m getting is that many Americans find it difficult to believe that their country would push an ally in Europe under the bus in order to win a strategic advantage.

    Given the current administration, I have no trouble believing it.

    That’s what I can’t understand — the same people who understand that the Biden administration’s domestic policy is a horrific shambles seem to think their foreign policy is sunshine and daisies.

    To be fair, sabotaging the Nord Stream pipelines is almost a caricature of neatly keeping the Russians out, the Americans in and the Germans down.  Arguably it’s in the US’ national interest, but it’s kind of rough on the Germans.

    • #85
  26. Zafar Member
    Zafar
    @Zafar

    Joseph Stanko (View Comment):

    Zafar (View Comment):
    What I’m getting is that many Americans find it difficult to believe that their country would push an ally in Europe under the bus in order to win a strategic advantage.

    I believe Noah Carl is British.

    Fan boy! I didn’t know that.  But also I was thinking more along the lines of what Americans find believable when they read it (confirmation bias re ‘my country is good’) rather than who writes for the target audience.

    • #86
  27. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    DrewInWisconsin, Oik (View Comment):

    Zafar (View Comment):
    What I’m getting is that many Americans find it difficult to believe that their country would push an ally in Europe under the bus in order to win a strategic advantage.

    Given the current administration, I have no trouble believing it.

    That’s what I can’t understand — the same people who understand that the Biden administration’s domestic policy is a horrific shambles seem to think their foreign policy is sunshine and daisies.

    Read Clifford’s short post.

     Blasted Assumptions

    • #87
  28. Zafar Member
    Zafar
    @Zafar

    South Stream and Turk Stream might be feeling nervous….

    • #88
  29. Joseph Stanko Coolidge
    Joseph Stanko
    @JosephStanko

    Zafar (View Comment):

    Joseph Stanko (View Comment):

    Zafar (View Comment):
    What I’m getting is that many Americans find it difficult to believe that their country would push an ally in Europe under the bus in order to win a strategic advantage.

    I believe Noah Carl is British.

    Fan boy! I didn’t know that. But also I was thinking more along the lines of what Americans find believable when they read it (confirmation bias re ‘my country is good’) rather than who writes for the target audience.

    I didn’t either until I looked him up just now, but the Daily Sceptic is run by Toby Young (of Ricochet’s London Calling podcast) and AFAIK most of its writers are Brits.

    • #89
  30. Joseph Stanko Coolidge
    Joseph Stanko
    @JosephStanko

    Zafar (View Comment):
    Arguably it’s in the US’ national interest, but it’s kind of rough on the Germans.

    Eh, we’re just helping them achieve their Net Zero and Green Energy goals a bit faster, is all.

    • #90
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.