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
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.
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.
Whats the point of turning off the gas as leverage if it *stays off*? That would be no leverage at all.
Showing that just switching away from Russia as a supplier is not enough to be safe, since they could just hit that one just as easily.
As mentioned elsewhere in this discussion Russia blew up the Georgian pipeline transporting gas between the two countries once before.
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?
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.
It’s in Russia’s interest to make its gas delivery reliable— that’s how you keep Europe dependent. The US wanted to end that dependence and ramp up US LNG market share. https://peoplesworld.org/article/pipeline-ploy-how-u-s-natur...
I don't think you're seeing things in perspective and the scale of the events.
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"
When Russia closed the pipe, it rippled through the market, and made EU pay more for the LNG.
When they blew the pipe GAS PRICES SPIKED 30%: https://www.cityam.com/gas-prices-spike-30-per-cent-amid-nor...
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.
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.
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.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FVbEoZXhCrM
You probably haven't seen this because the mainstream never shows it when talking about the pipeline sabotage.
But really, the question isn’t if we could or would, but if we did. Those are majorly different questions.
There are many ways to not allow the usage of the pipeline - politics, sanctions, etc.
But you had to nail it down to pipe blowing.
I don’t know or care, but the number of bots that appeared after this happened makes it seem more like a Russian coverup than an American one.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/11/18/ukraine-miss...