Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Thoughts on the Nord Stream Explosions
Thanks to @unsk and @hartmannvonaue for their posts on the Nord Stream pipeline explosions. I’ve reviewed the discussion at both, and have some thoughts about possible blame, which are probably too long for the comments.
I start with my understanding of the situation. Please correct me if I get any of this wrong.
There are two Nord Stream natural gas pipelines designed to supply Russian natural gas to western Europe, especially Germany. One has been operational in the past, and one was on the verge of becoming operational when the war in Ukraine began. The non-operational pipeline has not been opened, and Russia ceased gas deliveries through the other pipeline some time ago, claiming technical problems.
Germany and other parts of Europe are already suffering from high energy prices, and face significant pain this winter in the absence of Russian gas deliveries.
There are other pipelines delivering Russian gas to Europe, one through Turkey with limited capacity, and others through Ukraine with larger capacity.
On Monday, two underwater explosions in international waters damaged the pipelines, causing three leaks. I don’t know how severe the damage might be, or how long it might take to repair. If anyone has such information, please let me know in the comments. For the moment, for the sake of discussion, I will assume that the damage to the pipelines will cause serious suffering in Europe this winter. If not, then the event will probably prove to be much ado about nothing, at least in terms of gas flow. The political ramifications could be significant.
There seems to be widespread agreement that this was an act of sabotage, with widely divergent claims about the identity of the responsible party. One strange report comes from Radoslaw Sikorski, a member of the European Parliament and a former foreign minister of Poland, who sent a tweet with a photo of the gas leak and the short comment, “Thank you, USA.” At this time, I have no idea whether Sikorski has actual knowledge of US involvement, or is simply expressing his opinion.
So, here are my initial thoughts about some potentially responsible parties.
I. The US
Tucker Carlson joined Sikorski in suggesting that the US is responsible. I can see a viable argument for this being in the interest of the Biden administration assuming, as I believe to be the case, that they want to continue supporting Ukraine’s war effort.
Russia already had control over gas flow through the pipelines, and had already cut off that flow. Russia’s apparent goal is to pressure Germany and other European countries to stop supporting Ukraine, or face a possible energy crisis this winter. I’ve seen some reports of European demonstrations in favor of opening the pipelines, but I don’t know if this is widespread or is the action of a small fringe.
In any event, there is some possibility of Europe deciding that supporting Ukraine simply isn’t worth the suffering of an energy crisis. Damaging the pipelines eliminates Russia’s ability to resume the flow of gas, eliminating his energy leverage. It does so in a way that is painful for Europe, of course, but it does remove any temptation that the Europeans might have to yield to Russia’s pressure.
I think that this makes it plausible that the US could be responsible. At least, there is an obvious way that the damage to the pipelines would advance US interests, as defined by the Biden administration,
I do think that this possibility is unlikely, though. It seems quite risky, to me, due to the danger of exposure.
How do you think that the Europeans would react to proof that the US damaged the pipelines, causing widespread suffering in Germany and other parts of Europe? I would expect them to be quite upset, perhaps to the point of fragmenting the general agreement to continue supporting the Ukrainians.
II. Russia
I think that it is quite unlikely that Russia is responsible, though I can construct a devious hypothesis that might be to Russia’s benefit.
The idea that Russia wanted to destroy its own pipelines, to cut off the supply of gas to Europe, seems laughable to me. Russia has already stopped the flow of gas through those pipelines. Its evident purpose is to pressure the Europeans to cease supporting Ukraine, a goal that can only be accomplished if Russia is capable of turning the gas back on, if Europe complies.
I’ve seen a few suggestions that Putin would do this so that he has “plausible deniability.” This strikes me as very implausible. Why would Putin need such deniability? Do you think that the Russians object to cutting off the supply of gas to Europe? Why would they? From what I’ve seen, Russia’s oil and gas revenue is significantly up this year.
It is true that Putin has offered excuses for turning off the flow in the operational pipeline. Why would he make such excuses? It seems to me that these stories offer “plausible deniability” to the Europeans. If I were a European politician inclined to believe that supporting Ukraine is not worth the suffering of a winter without Russian gas, I wouldn’t want to be seen publicly capitulating to Russia’s demands. I would want some diplomatic cover. I would want to offer some other reason to stop supporting Ukraine, allowing Putin to “fix” the technical problems in the pipeline and solve my country’s energy problem. Nudge nudge, wink, wink, say no more.
The pipeline sabotage could benefit Russia, though, if it manages to frame someone else. For example, what if Russia framed Ukraine? This might really annoy the Europeans, and lead them to withdraw their support. Similarly, if Russia framed the US, or even Germany, this could undermine European support for Ukraine.
III. Germany
I’ll present this argument about Germany, though I think that it applies to any other European country facing the same problem. Could Germany benefit from the pipeline sabotage?
The argument here is similar to the US. The German government appears to want to continue supporting Ukraine’s war effort, but may face political backlash from an energy shortfall. There could be political pressure to yield to Russia. By damaging the pipelines, Germany would make it impossible for Putin to resume the gas flow, removing the temptation — and political pressure — to negotiate.
As with the US, I think that this is unlikely, because it is risky. What if it were discovered? I imagine that the Germans would be pretty unhappy with their government.
IV. Ukraine
Ukraine is an obvious beneficiary of the pipeline sabotage, as it reduces the risk that Europe will yield to the pressure being exerted by Russia’s gas embargo. Again, if Russia can’t turn on the flow anyway, Europe has nothing to gain by ceasing its support of Ukraine.
As with the US and Germany, this strikes me as a very risky thing for Ukraine to do. If discovered, both the US and Europe might well be outraged.
I do think that Ukraine is more likely to be at fault than the US or Europe, but still not very likely. The reason for this is possible desperation. I don’t know how desperate the Ukrainian situation might be, as they have had some apparent success — and territorial gains — over the past few weeks. What I don’t know is the price that they’ve paid for these gains, and the damage that they inflicted on the Russians. It’s possible that the recent Ukrainian advances, though small now, are something like a mini-Stalingrad, and that they will now begin to drive the Russians back, albeit slowly. On the other hand, it’s possible that we’re witnessing the Ukrainian remake of the Battle of the Bulge, or the German Spring Offensive of 1918 — a last-ditch, desperation attack after which the army collapses. It’s also possible that this is a minor, unimportant shift in the front during what could prove to be a long war of attrition.
I don’t have an opinion about which of these might be occurring.
I think that there was a comment, on one of the other posts, suggesting that Ukraine benefits because it now has control of almost all of the pipelines available to carry Russian gas to Europe. The comment seemed to suggest that Ukraine might take action to cut off that gas supply. A quick internet search indicates that Russia is still sending gas through these pipelines, though perhaps to different parts of Europe.
In any event, I think that it would be an extraordinarily foolish move for Ukraine to deliberately cut off the supply of Russian gas to Europe. Ukraine would be inflicting suffering on European countries that are supporting its war effort. It would be like having a rich uncle giving you money to keep you afloat, and then kicking him in the teeth.
V. Israel
Hey, you always have to consider the possibility that the Mossad is behind something. They may well be the smartest, trickiest, most skilled clandestine organization on the planet. Ruthless, too.
Don’t get me wrong. I actually admire these traits in them. In Putin, too, though I don’t think that he’s in quite the same league as the Israelis.
I can’t come up with any plausible reason for Israel to pull off this sabotage.
VI. China
I have trouble concocting a reason for China to damage these particular pipelines. Frankly, China doesn’t seem to have much practical interest in the war in Ukraine. It seems to tepidly support Russia, making it even less likely that China would want to undermine Putin’s leverage.
VII. A Dark Horse
So, I settle on SPECTRE, so to speak. Some shadowy organization that strongly supports Ukraine, and wants to undermine Russia’s leverage to keep the money and weapons flowing to Kiev. This might be ideological, or it might simply be greed on the part of someone, or some group, that is profiting from such aid. Ukraine seems to be a pretty corrupt place, after all.
Such a “Dark Horse” wouldn’t face the same disincentive to being discovered. They might be caught and punished, of course, but they wouldn’t face the political fallout discussed with respect to the various potentially responsible countries. If they’re smart, and they’d probably have to be pretty smart to pull off this type of sabotage, then the money-men might be hard to identify. Something like the Saudis, or maybe someone else, behind the 9/11 attack by funding Al Qaeda.
To me, this seems the most likely possibility. It’s not very satisfying, as the identity of such a culprit might never be discovered.
Perhaps such a Dark Horse might have a different motive. What if they just wanted to sow chaos, getting everybody to point the finger at everyone else? Conspiracy theories can run rampant. Could there be an anti-Trump agenda? Or an anti-Biden agenda, for that matter?
Based on the statements of Carlson and Sikorski, it seems possible that the bulk of the MAGA folks could end up blaming the US. I’m a MAGA guy myself, and I don’t reach that conclusion, but it might end up being the consensus.
I don’t see the Never-Trump Republicans blaming the US. My impression is that they are likely to join the Democrats in blaming Putin.
Whatever you think of MAGA or Never-Trump, this would continue to split the Republican coalition, already damaged by disagreements over the 2020 election, the Capitol riot, and a number of other issues.
Published in General
Hey! Rule nothing, or no one, out!
I think you need to expand the list to include Poland, the Baltics (Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia) and the Scandinavians (Sweden, Norway, Finland).
Those that are front line states with Russia have the motive to reduce Russia’s leverage over the rest of Europe.
Those that are energy producers have the motive to eliminate competition and raise prices.
The more I think about, the less visible military assets seem to be necessary. @BDB made the point yesterday that this could be accomplished with a heavy-weight seabed following drone tossed off the back of some random ship passing by – even a fishing trawler would work. The attacks happened at the narrower part of the Baltic, where there are dozens of candidate vessels passing by each day (just look at a ship tracker) so good luck figuring out which one did the dirty deed.
And ‘evidence’?? Baloney, it’s all speculation at this point, including this post.
How about another motive for the Russians, just for fun. How much does it benefit Russia if this happens and Ukraine and the US get the blame for it happening. Might drive a wedge between the US and Europe. Could help break up NATO. Definitely sours support for Ukraine. All in all might be worth some damage to a pipeline that you could fix later. Now that is the kind of high risk gamble that Putin might be capable of. I don’t know who did this and not sure I subscribe to the Russian theory, but that could be a motive.
1 like it or not FJB and his handlers ARE America per se. Blaming them IS blaming America.
2 Objectively, Russia has as much if not more means motive and opportunity AND track record. The Baltic Sea is their front yard. The Baltic Sea Fleet is right up the street in Kaliningrad.
They have no motive. This weakens their position and strengthens the US’ position.
I’m with @garymcvey and @ekosj here. People are sounding like loons here. So many on our side have become so blind with rage over, well, everything, that you’ve become conspiracy theorists or, as Gary said, “blame America first conservatives”. I don’t know what happened, but some of the theories here and in the other threads are so ridiculous, I can only feel sympathy.
Clearly, only Russia or a NATO member could have done this. They are the only ones with the capability. If a NATO member did this, it could very well be cause for removal. This would be a hostile act against several countries’ sovereignty. To me, it is either an accident or Russia. Who knows what was billowing down there for the past weeks, and Russia is doing everything it can to sow chaos in the world right now. They are masters of asymmetric warfare and will cut its own nose to spite its face over and over if it makes their enemies angry.
I also see people mentioning Norway, Israel, China, Ukraine, the WEF, etc. If you think any of them can do this in the middle of the Baltic Sea which is one of the most scrutinized areas in the world, I just can’t help you. You have to take a long hard look at yourself.
?
There’s already a wedge between the US and Europe, and it’s going to get sharper come winter.
All of the trends you note are in various stages already.
And none of it takes away from the diminished leverage Russia gets because of this.
The long term take away is a reminder to Europe that undersea pipelines are also vulnerable.
Two possible responses:
No more under water pipelines, in fact no energy from Russia, it’s just too risky; or
No more under water pipelines, we need a safe overland route from Russia with a friendly government assuring it.
Edited to add:
Another takeaway: a reminder to Germany of their place in NATO and the world. They lost their heads and thought they were Americans. Guess what? It’s been 70 years and your name tag now has ‘ally’ on it, but you’re still conquered people. Your interests come a distant second, keep that in mind before raising your head this winter.
Is this a real thing? Or just invented for this one occasion.
Why not? There are “blame America never” conservatives, so….
I’m not familiar with them either.
Now to undermine my own argument against Russia:
For those who want to go further down the motivation and speculation rabbit hole, this is a very interesting thread:
https://nitter.net/TrentTelenko/status/1575222209525972993#m
Okay, blame America for one overseas disaster. Just one.
I got it from Gary and I agree with him. Something has changed with our side. Many have lost all faith in our country now.
Oh, you are naive. But seriously, I don’t know any groups of conservative Americans who either completely denigrate or completely excuse America. Okay, I can think of one, but they’re certainly not conservatives. And maybe all woke progressives, but they’re not conservatives either.
Added: Okay maybe several, but none of them are remotely conservative, or even slightly right of center.
Well, I don’t know any.
Risk has to be assessed in the context of cost:benefit.
If this was about to happen anyway – and it might be given winter, Germany, hospitals, blahblahblah – then blowing up the pipelines would start looking worth the risk.
I’m sure it was off the books. Either by dragging poor Israel into it a la Iran-Contra (jeez guys, give Israel a break) or Poland or some place like that – or more likely some private group (the Spectre).
It’s part of my unnatural charm!
Just one thing. Just one.
And this makes it worse if the Europeans blame the Americans.
True gives me pause, but as I said this is a thought exercise. That fact also helps them sell this as an American operation.
I could believe that with different US president. I have trouble believing that with this administration. They aren’t foreign policy hawks. If anything they are doves. Russia’s war in Ukraine is a inconvenience of the first order to these folks. That isn’t to say they weren’t looking to make a lot of money from Ukraine. It is to say they don’t appear to be the forceful master manipulators people make them out to be. They generally most of the time look like bumbling idiots. Plus why blow up a pipeline when all you had to do was not let it get completed in the first place. Biden removed the sanctions on Nord Stream 2 at Germany’s request.
One more example of the self-proclaimed “conservatives” who Michael Anton called out at American Greatness. https://ricochet.com/1317982/michael-anton-what-does-fidelity-to-our-founding-principles-require-of-us-today/ … Bill and Steve and Jonah and David and Kevin.
This is a new term coined by these imposters. They think that they are hilarious by turning an actual conservative position around and twist it into a pejorative against a conservative patriot.
You can blame a bumbling, clueless idiot President for possibly doing stupid stuff, without being labeled a ‘blame America first’ person. I can distinguish between America, the country and its Constitution and history and the foreign policy of Joe Biden’s administration. And it ain’t ‘blame America first’. It is FJB.
The rest of the world doesn’t really differentiate between Biden and the US Govt.
Why were they so determined to keep the possibility of Ukraine joining NATO viable? Arguably that triggered the war.
So why are they keeping it going? They could get Ukraine to negotiate peace tomorrow.
I think they lack the vision to see foreign affairs through anything but the prism of domestic politics. And money.
It was being held up by German certification, yes. I think they assumed Ukraine would be over by now, that their sanctions against Russia would have won them the game rather than backfiring so spectacularly – especially on Europe.
The situation changed, and suddenly German certification even without Victory In Ukrain was a possiblity. Well not any more, bucko!
Yes, but Americans do between each other.
I disagree. I think this would be an extraordinarily smart thing for the US to have done. However, given the current administration, I think we can rule out the USA doing it. The smart parts of the Biden administration are firmly against US interests. So are the stupid parts.
They could if they were willing to strong arm Ukraine. They aren’t. They are not willing say no to anyone except Russia. It is truly one of the most amazing things to behold.
I think we may agree on this one. Although I think you give them too much credit for being forward looking and ruthless.
It wasn’t just German certification. The US had sanctions on any company doing business with Russia on Nordstream 2 Biden actually veto the sanctions bill which had strong bipartisan support at the Request of Germany. I agree they miscalculated on Russian sanctions, normal for a democratic administration they always assume sanctions will be more efficacious than they actually are. They also assumed that Ukraine would lose or have to sue for peace by now. Neither of which came to be.
That is true. It just it doesn’t fit the pattern of democratic behavior in governance. It is too muscular and self assured. I could see this kind of thing happening a generation ago. I have said elsewhere I could see Trump doing something like this under certain circumstance. I just have trouble swallowing it from Biden. I have trouble seeing someone who got rolled by the Saudis, Venezuelans, and Taliban being steely eyed enough to authorize a deliberate attack on a European ally for the sake of Ukraine. If they it really is this group I am truly selling them short.
What do you mean by just one thing?
Oh. So FJB is being confused with BAF. Got it. And thanks for the tip-off. :)
That’s their mistake. It really is quite ignorant of the facts. Something like calling Italy suddenly fascist every time a conservative is PM.
Country, no. Government institutions, yes.
The idea that the US government would scrupulously carry out an investigation of this event is naive in the extreme. What the government is good at is inventing a narrative that makes it look good, manufacturing ‘evidence ‘ that fits the narrative, trotting out an ‘expert’ to spread the lie, have a poodle press that spreads the lie far and wide, and have social media companies suppress any talk that contradicts the narrative. It’s beyond me why anyone believes these people who constantly feed us one lie after another.
A sign of desperation, but whose?
I think America’s – not so much about Ukraine but about keeping Europe in line.