Finnish president says undersea pipeline, cables damaged by 'external activity' | Hacker News Reader

Finnish president says undersea pipeline, cables damaged by 'external activity'

apnews.com

84 pointsanigbrowl84 comments

Hmm... You know, just like the Sea of Azov and the Black Sea, the Baltic has some natural pinch-points, with bridges across them, where access to the Atlantic Ocean could easily be restricted...

EDIT: Yes, I'm aware of the legal details. For purposes of symbolism, intrusive surveillance (of maritime activity), and saber-rattling, those details hardly matter. I'll even speculate that no respected international judges nor squeaky-clean lawyers signed off on the "external activity" that damaged the undersea pipeline and cables near Finland.

But unlike the Black Sea, there’s no legal contract that gives any of the states the power that Turkey has: Block warships from entering and leaving. Even the Black Sea is open for civilian shipping from and to Russia, including Russian flagged merchant vessels.

Now, in time of war, Denmark and Sweden would control the entrance to the Baltic Sea, and Finnland and Estonia could make it hard for the Russian fleet to leave the port of St. Petersburg, but for now neither state is at war with Russia, the international shipping lanes remain open, even for Russian military and spy vessels.

There is no bridge (/set of bridges) that completely cuts off the Baltic Sea--the Øresund is a bridge-tunnel, so the shipping lanes are completely unencumbered by bridges.

Although like the Black Sea, there is a corresponding treaty governing the the straits as an international waterway.

> ...there is a corresponding treaty governing the straits...

So I've heard. I've also heard of a treaty guaranteeing Ukraine's territorial integrity, and signed by Russia.

Yes, indeed. And Russia violated the Treaty and now there's war in Ukraine. But it upheld the treaty regarding the Dardanelles strait, probably because Turkey is a NATO member and war with the NATO is really not something anyone wants, inlcuding Russia and the NATO.

So in the Baltic sea, there's essentially two options: Either respect the treaties and keep the shipping lanes open or violate it and risk war with Russia. Until now, no critical infrastructure was attacked (the nord stream pipelines were out of use when they were blown up), so a less aggressive posturer seemed reasonable. Maybe that'll change now.

Apart from that, the Dardanelles are 1.2km wide at the narrow point, the Gulf of Finland is 70km wide - blocking that is essentially impossible unless you go for a naval blockade and attack civilian ships.

Speaking of pinch points, I've always wondered what the tides are like in the Skagerrak, and how subs deal with it.

Why does the narrative that Russia blew up its own pipeline exist.

Because there are a number of internal actors who would have benefited from doing so. For example, if Putin had felt threatened by someone trying to overthrow him, and negotiate an end to sanctions (and the Ukraine war), it might make sense to sabotage Nordstream and reduce the potential financial benefits from the coup.

In short, while it might not make sense for "Russia to blow up its own pipeline", it would make sense for 'certain Russians to blow up a pipeline owned by other Russians'.

They destroyed their own economy for no good reason, why wouldn't they blow up their own pipeline too? Very little makes sense with regards to Russia's belligerent actions.

"Destroyed" is far too strong. Their economy is doing fine all things considered.

All things considered? Their economy is doing much better than the majority of Europe. [1] Austria = 0.4, Canada = 1.7, France = 0.8, Germany = (-0.3), Sweden (-0.5), Switzerland 0.8, Italy = 1.1, etc. The overall growth rate in Europe is 0.6. Russia is at 1.5%. And Wiki is somewhat outdated. Their 2nd quarter growth has been published, and it's now up to 4.9%.

IMO we're currently looking at a major inflection point in history, yet so many have no idea of what's happening. In the USSR there were two major state newspapers, pravda (meaning truth) and novosti (meaning news). A USSR era joke was, "Why do we have two newspapers, truth and news? Well that's because there's no truth in the news, and no news in the truth."

[1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_real_GDP_...

I added the "all things considered" because someone would inevitably come along and suggest that they could be doing better had they not invaded. It's much harder to disagree with the statement I made while also still making the point I wanted to make.

But yeah, I agree with you. Russia's economy is looking very robust right now when compared to many major European economies.

The fact is the Ruble has been in steady decline. https://www.google.com/search?q=price+of+ruble Hit the "Max" tab. If that isn't what destroying their economy looks like, then maybe you need to take a another look.

The economy of Europe will recover, Russia's will not. The price of the Euro is very stable and increasing. https://www.google.com/search?q=price+of+euro

Germany, France, and the UK all have larger economies than Russia. Germany was 2x that of Russia's and is far smaller in geographic area.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/268173/countries-with-th...

>The overall growth rate in Europe is 0.6. Russia is at 1.5%.

According to who?? Putin? I guess if you're hitting rock bottom, there's no place to go but up?

Thanks but I'll put my money in Euros before I put it into Rubles.

The data on Wiki is from the IMF. [1] Incidentally it's also outdated there. The recent changes continue to trend in the same direction. They're reporting Russia's growth as 2.2% while Germany's down to -0.5%. Interestingly Russia is now growing even faster than the US as well.

It's definitely true that Russia's currency is currently weakening, but the reason this is a threat is not because that in and of itself, but rather knock-on effects. A big one is inflation. And Russia is absolutely seeing rapidly increasing inflation right now [2], but it remains to see if that starts hitting threatening levels.

In the current state of the world I think putting your money in any currency is absurdly risky, with very little hope for meaningful returns. It's the reason even US treasuries are paying out such high interest rates. As always, it seems the only real hedge is "real" things - precious metals, real estate, and so on.

[1] - https://www.imf.org/external/datamapper/NGDP_RPCH@WEO/OEMDC/...

[2] - https://tradingeconomics.com/russia/inflation-cpi

Russia is a pariah state, sanctioned and with more sanctions coming. Yes, the sanctions are working - they take time, and the fall of the ruble absolutely shows this. The ruble has done nothing but drop over time. The Euro and the Dollar fluctuate but are not in the shitter like the ruble is. The more war that russia wants to wage, the lower their currency will fall and the rest of the civilized world turns their back to russia. And nobody should believe that russia's growth is "2.2%" when they lie about everything and anything, including the state of their economy.

Again, the figures are coming from the IMF, who not only assess the figures independently, but also offer their own independent projections as well. And a weak currency is not an inherent problem. For net exporters it's a benefit. It means that right now Russia is getting more ruble for every ounce of oil they sell, yet the buyers aren't paying anymore for it. Win win for everybody. If those inflows don't create real problems, like inflation, then the low exchange rate is just driving wealth generation and economic growth. This is why export heavy places like China go out of their way to weaken their currency.

As for pariah, the main countries trying to "isolate" Russia are the US and the usual suspects. And "we" make up less than 15% of the world. It's why we carried out the equivalent of a nuclear economic attack with the sanctions, yet here we are, a year later, debating minutia when looking at the impact.

The ruble peaked in 2008 at 0.043USD, and this week it was at 0.009, and you're trying to tell me this is a good thing? lol, quit huffing Putin's farts.

Right, now look at economic data that directly influence things like quality of life, or economic stability of the country, and compare between 2008 and today. You'll find that things are better to a degree that cannot really be overstated. For instance real wages are up to a somewhat ridiculous degree, home ownership rates are substantially up (now higher than 90%!), and so on.

This [1] page is a data orgy for any sort of economic indicator that might interest you. The one thing to be careful about is to ensure you're using real (inflation adjusted) values and PPP adjusted values. A dollar goes much further in Russia whether buying tanks or tacos, so doing something like comparing nominal GDP values is misleading. It's like how a guy earning $70k in Bodunk is, in practice, earning dramatically more than a guy earning $70k in San Francisco. Even though the nominal figures are identical, $70k goes much further in Bodunk than San Francisco. Same thing, often to an even more extreme degree, between countries.

[1] - https://tradingeconomics.com/russia/home-ownership-rate

>For instance real wages are up to a somewhat ridiculous degree, home ownership rates are substantially up (now higher than 90%!), and so on.

lol, everyone with half a brain ran from Russia as soon as they could, and they aren't coming back if they can avoid it. And the ruble will continue to sink lower and lower. There's no reason to think it wouldn't and no matter how you try to spin it, that's not a good thing for Russia's economy.

The site has data on that too!

In 2008, there were 68 million employed persons. Today there are 74 million. In 2008 there was a population of 142 million, today it's 146 million. Even their fertility rate is up, after much focus on it. In 2008 it was 1.456, today it's 1.825 [1]. Still far too low, especially for a country with so much land, but this is a struggle all developed nations are currently facing and, by that standard, 1.825 is better than average.

These are simply data. The spin is how the media takes one single data point, and disingenuously frames is as a core targeted effect. The sanctions are certainly having an impact, but in terms of the desired outcome - the destabilization or collapse of Russia - they have been a complete failure. Instead the primary consequence of our actions has been to split the world in 2, almost certainly to our own detriment.

[1] - https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/RUS/russia/fertility-r...

You work hard to serve Putin. Lies are all that Russia has. There is no reason to believe any numbers that Russia supplies about their economy. They lie about literally everything. It's easier than having actual prosperity.

You know you can take a stroll around e.g. Moscow anytime you like? Search YouTube for something like "Прогулка по Москве". That means 'taking a walk around Moscow'. Change москве to Санкт-Петербург for St. Petersburg. Here's [1] a video from a couple of months ago in Petersburg at the tail end of summer. Here's [2] one from literally 2 hours ago in Moscow. That would've been at around 7pm, and in 13C Fall weather, so not the most enticing, but it also gives an interesting perspective IMO.

Russia is the new enemy, or the old one I suppose. We've always been at war with Eastasia after all, right? Perhaps a more appropriate reference would be, "The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command."

[1] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ZuoXU6y5sY

[2] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q_yIkGFzKeU

>You know you can take a stroll around e.g. Moscow anytime you like?

No thanks, I never, ever would do that, because FUCK RUSSIA.

Up to you. Personally before deciding to hate something or somebody as much as you seemingly do, based on the words of others, I'd like to ensure that what they're saying is at least true. Otherwise, you risk just becoming a hate fueled tool, literally no different than Germany circa 1935.

Oh, so you don't think I have enough information about Russia to form an opinion? lol, you really do work for Putin, you've removed all doubt.

FUCK RUSSIA.

I'm certain you've exposed yourself to a quite impressive volume of Irrefutable and Undeniable [1] information. The problem in society is people not learning from the past. What happened yesterday is happening today, and will happen again tomorrow.

[1] - https://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/06/opinion/irrefutable-and-u...

Russia doing awful shit and getting sanctioned for it is nothing new. It happened yesterday, is happening today, and will continue to happen so long as they are a mafia state that uses violence to achieve their wrong goals.

So which super-power would you hold up as a model of integrity that Russia ought strive to emulate? The one upon which you are basing your standards of acceptable behavior?

Any one except the thuggish lying mafia state of Russia. It's really not difficult to be better than Russia. Maybe if you get rid of Putin and get rid of the mafia bullshit you'll have a brighter future.

The question I asked wasn't a gotcha, it was an effort to let you realize your own cognitive dissonance - reflected in your inability to answer the question. In other words, if you saw only the behaviors of countries, but without any names associated, would you still judge them the same way? The answer is clearly no.

The irrational level of hate and disdain for a country you know seemingly nothing about is not natural. It's a mixture of endless propaganda, and likely being 'surrounded' (so much as the digital world counts) by other people who also support and encourage such hatred. Again the state of society today is much like a mirror into Germany 1935.

You have no idea what I know about Russia, so do not claim to know that. This is over. Enjoy your declining economy, and your shitty mafia country. FUCK RUSSIA.

Well we can only infer about each other based upon the words of the other, right? You've inferred that I'm apparently an agent of Russia sent to propagandize you in some obscure thread nobody else will ever read. Quite the ego you have there! And I've made my inferences as well. It was an interesting chat and I learned a lot. Thanks.

до свидания камрад

https://www.google.com/search?q=price+of+ruble Hit the "Max" tab.

One theory is that it allows the Russian company that was supposed to deliver gas to Europe to get out of paying fines for not delivering enough gas - they'd blame it on force majeure. They were intentionally limiting gas deliveries to pressure Europe out of helping Ukraine, and this was a way to blame it on someone else.

> it allows the Russian company that was supposed to deliver gas to Europe to get out of paying fines for not delivering enough gas

I think the evidence favors either Russia or Ukraine having destroyed the pipeline. But this isn't a great reason. Russia straight up stole the airplanes its domestic airlines leased. It could simply refuse to pay the fines, too.

> Russia straight up stole the airplanes its domestic airlines leased. It could simply refuse to pay the fines, too.

Well, the planes already were in Russia, foreign lenders can't seize them. But fines for non-delivery can still be taken in by seizing assets of the Russian companies in Western countries. Our legal systems unfortunately don't allow wholesale seizure of everything Russia, so it needs an actual contract violation for a seizure order to be upheld.

> the planes already were in Russia, foreign lenders can't seize them. But fines for non-delivery can still be taken in by seizing assets of the Russian companies in Western countries.

You can do the same thing to compensate the owners of the planes.

No. You can't go and seize a random oligarch's assets to compensate the lenders of airplanes, and Aeroflot takes great care to avoid airspace where Western sanctions could hit them - the exception being Turkey, but they won't do anything that endangers their sort-of "neutrality".

> can't go and seize a random oligarch's assets to compensate the lenders of airplanes

You said "assets of the Russian companies." I'd curtail that to assets of the Russian state. Aeroflot is state owned. (It's why Aeroflot settled [1].)

[1] https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/aircraft-...

Are you talking about the Nord Stream pipeline blown up last year?

Because this specific pipeline has nothing to do with Russia. The opposite, it connects Finland to the Baltic States which have a pipeline with Poland and then the rest of Europe...

So if Russia is indeed blowing up pipelines blowing up Balticconnector would make perfect sense.

Oh damn, you're right, I totally misread the article

Because sometimes you sacrifice the queen to win the game.

The best evidence convincing me personally was the overwise unexplainable behavior of a tanker of a Greek company connected to Putin

https://www.businessinsider.com/nord-stream-mystery-minerva-...

Totally unrelated news from 5 days ago:

> Putin: Russia can still supply gas via Nord Stream 2 as one line intact

https://www.reuters.com/article/russia-putin-nord-stream-idU...

How convenient those shadowy saboteurs left that pipeline intact.

Has anyone good a decent summary of the likely series of events, ideally from a good source?

My understanding of it is very confused and the series of finger pointing exercises has left me baffled at who is likely to blame. I have followed along but it’s not at all clear to me who is to blame.

Long read, TL;DR in the title.

https://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/investigating-th...

According to European intelligence, most traces lead to Ukraine.

See e.g. https://www.tagesschau.de/investigativ/nord-stream-explosion... (German)

I feel it's down to two suspects:

1. The US said they would do it, then did it 2. Ukraine did it, because most European intelligence agencies believe this to be true.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com