Who DID blow up the Nord Stream gas pipelines… Russia or America?

Deep under the Baltic Sea, a remote-controlled submarine releases a mine that nestles next to a gas pipeline.

Other mines are being laid at critical intersections along hundreds of miles of pipelines connecting Russia and Germany. They contain the equivalent of hundreds of pounds of TNT.

When detonated — either by a timing device or remotely from a secret control room — the aftershocks are felt 800 miles away, and seismologists liken the blast to earthquakes.

Within seconds, Nord Stream 1 and 2 begin to leak. Within days, millions of cubic meters of natural gas were released into Danish and Swedish waters.

Mission accomplished for whoever initiated this unprecedented act of industrial terrorism.

But was it also Vladimir Putin’s staggering act of self-sabotage that the world assumed it was?

After all, the president who threatened to ‘end’ Nord Stream earlier this year does not live in the Kremlin but in the White House. US President Joe Biden could not have been clearer when he pledged in early February to “bring to an end” Nord Stream if Russian troops and tanks entered Ukraine.

US President Joe Biden could not have been clearer when he pledged in early February to ‘bring to an end’ Nord Stream if Russian troops and tanks entered Ukraine

A photo from the Danish Ministry of Defense shows the location of the gas leak in the Nord Stream pipeline

The invasion has happened. So did Mr. Biden take revenge as he promised?

At the time, he rejected suggestions that such an operation would be too complicated to carry out or too damaging diplomatically, given that Nord Stream 2 was controlled by Germany. To the doubters, he added, “We will, I promise you. We’ll do it.’

These comments have proved to be a propaganda gift to the Kremlin in the wake of the leaks.

Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova mocked the blunder-prone US president and challenged him to account for his words and actions.

It can seem fanciful to look elsewhere than Moscow to find the culprits. However, these incidents occurred in areas of the Baltic Sea that belonged to US allies Denmark and Sweden.

While Russian ships have the right to enter these “exclusive economic zones,” the US and its friends are expected to closely monitor their activities. Perhaps the US stood by and allowed the plot to be carried out?

The thinking in Washington DC might have been that such an incident would convince the European states most dependent on Russia for energy supplies to redouble their efforts to achieve energy independence.

Was this the staggering act of self-sabotage by Vladimir Putin that the world assumes was?

It is no coincidence that these states, such as Germany, have been the most reluctant to actively challenge Russian military supremacy in Ukraine and most fervent for President Volodymyr Zelensky to negotiate with President Putin.

There is certainly consternation in continental Europe after the attack on the pipelines. The natural gas that is released is 90 percent methane, an important driver of global warming. So Putin, or whoever, has weaponized pollution.

Denmark has said the discharge could be responsible for a third of its greenhouse gas emissions. Norway has put its oil and gas facilities on edge for attacks. Lithuania increased security at its liquefied natural gas import terminal.

But whose long-term strategic goals are achieved by the attacks, those of Russia or the US? The plot thickened on Tuesday when a former Polish minister thanked the US for the Nord Stream explosions.

On Twitter, Radoslaw Sikorski posted a photo of a massive spill of methane gas on the surface of the Baltic Sea with the comment: ‘Thank You USA’. The aggressive MEP later tweeted that if Russia wants to continue supplying gas to Europe, it must “talk to the countries that control the gas pipelines.”

What did he mean? Both Russia and the US have the technology and resources to carry out such an attack, while surveillance of the North and Baltic Seas would be patchy.

Many Russian surface naval vessels carry miniature submarines, such as the unmanned underwater vehicle Harpsichord (UUV), the Klavesin and the Losharik. These intelligent ‘marine robots’ can be used for deep-sea surveillance and the delivery of explosive charges.

Historically, submarine warfare was a strong Russian force, a tradition that continues to this day. These UUVs are equipped with precise navigation and communication equipment and their submersible capability brings the bottom of the Baltic Sea within their reach.

The attacks also highlighted the vulnerability of the underwater cable networks on which Britain and other countries rely.

Retired Admiral Chris Parry told the Daily Mail that the UK is “wide open” to a similar attack.

He sounded a shocking warning last night, saying: “The protection and defense of these vital energy and communications arteries have been neglected, even as military and civilian technologies and platforms, both manned and unmanned, are capable of disrupting and damaging them.” , have increased significantly. Not only the UK is at risk, but the entire international community is at risk.’

Fears of internet and mobile phone blackouts this winter have increased recently as Europe doesn’t have enough backup systems to rely on in the event of a power outage.

By targeting key infrastructure, one hostile state—especially one that, like Russia, has suffered setbacks on the battlefield—can bring another state to a standstill. Reducing energy supplies is just one way to achieve this.

Russia, or anyone else for that matter, has primed Britain and Europe for further attacks, perhaps on undersea data cables carrying financial information across the Atlantic – wreaking havoc on stock markets.