Several German media as well as the “New York Times” and the “Washington Post” report on new findings in the case of the attack on the Nord Stream gas pipelines in the Baltic Sea. The German reports in particular contain some interesting details. On the basis of the known findings, however, there can be no question of a reliable trace.
What is known about the explosions at the Nord Stream pipelines?
After research by the ARD capital studio, the magazine Kontraste, SWR and “Zeit”, investigators have compiled a whole series of findings relating to the attacks on the gas pipelines. A six-person commando is “supposed” to be responsible for the blasting; the cautious wording is also used by journalists who for the ARD and for the time” wrote down their information.
According to the reports, the group consisted of a captain, two divers, two dive assistants and a doctor. Together they are said to have rented a yacht in Rostock on September 6 – almost three weeks before the explosions. After the ship was returned, traces of explosives were found in it. According to “Zeit”, this could indicate that the assassins did not have enough time to cover their tracks. But that might just be speculation. One could also assume that the group wanted to lay a trail.
The yacht was sighted in Wieck, a small town in Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania that can only be reached from the Baltic Sea via the Bodden, the body of water south of the Fischland-Darss-Zingst peninsula. The ship is also said to have called at the port of the Danish island of Christiansø, northeast of Bornholm.
What does the Attorney General say?
Not much. On Wednesday, at the request of the German Press Agency, she announced that she had had a search carried out on a ship from January 18 to 20 “in connection with a suspicious ship rental”. There is a suspicion that it was used to transport explosive devices that detonated on the pipelines on September 26, 2022, according to a spokeswoman for the agency. The evaluation of the seized traces and objects is ongoing. “The identity of the perpetrators and their motives are the subject of ongoing investigations,” it said from Karlsruhe. “Reliable statements on this, especially on the question of state control, cannot be made at the moment.”
And the traces to Ukraine?
The journalists involved in the recent research write in their articles, according to the investigation “tracks lead towards Ukraine” respectively would “on connections towards Ukraine” interpret. As evidence, they cite that the company renting the yacht “apparently” is owned by two Ukrainians. These are indications of a “pro-Ukrainian group”.
These hints don’t sound really safe. Of course, it is possible that the investigators have other leads that lead “towards Ukraine”. So far, however, nothing is known about it.
Aren’t there new findings from the US secret services?
There are reports, but they are quite vague. Articles appeared more or less at the same time as the reports from ARD and “Zeit”. in the “New York Times” and the “Washington Post”, according to which there is “new” or “more” intelligence that would point in the direction of Ukraine. Both newspapers also speak of a “pro-Ukrainian group” that may have carried out the attack. The New York Times writes that there are no indications that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy or those around him gave the order or were otherwise involved. The “Washington Post” emphasizes that there is “still no forensic evidence” pointing to a specific country.
The review of the newly collected information suggests that the group is “opponents of the Russian president,” writes the New York Times. But there is no information about the members of the group, “or who managed or paid for the operation”. Security expert Nico Lange writes With a view to the article in the “New York Times”, the US secret services seem to have been particularly interested in the information that “no Americans or British” were involved in the attack.
What actually happened in September?
During the night of September 25-26, three of the four Nord Stream pipelines east of the island of Bornholm were blown up at a depth of 70 to 80 meters. Both pipelines consist of two strands; Line A of the younger Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline was damaged.
At the time of the explosions, both pipelines were full of gas but not operational. Because of the Russian war threats against Ukraine, the German side suspended the certification of Nord Stream 2 in November 2021 and stopped it on February 22, 2022, so that the line never went into operation. The delivery stop via Nord Stream 1 began in the summer of 2022 and was initially justified with allegedly necessary maintenance, until the Kremlin announced in early September that no gas would flow as long as the sanctions were in force.
Who could have an interest in the pipelines not working?
Germany has long portrayed both pipelines as purely economic projects, but that was never the truth. Warnings from Eastern European countries and the USA that Germany was making itself dependent on Russia for energy policy were consistently ignored by Berlin. During his visit to Washington in early February 2022, Chancellor Olaf Scholz avoided explicitly threatening consequences for Nord Stream 2 if Russia were to attack Ukraine. US President Joe Biden was less squeamish. Standing next to Scholz, he said that if Russian tanks crossed the border into Ukraine, “Nord Stream 2 will no longer exist”.
The phrase is cited as suggesting that the US may be behind the pipeline blasts, but in fact such a remark is not indicative. US investigative journalist Seymour Hersh, who wrote in February that US Navy divers planted the explosive devices on the pipelines, cited only one source. A interview, which he gave to the Berliner Zeitung, is full of whispers: “The people who own companies that build pipelines know the story,” said Hersh, for example. “I didn’t hear the story from them, but I quickly learned they knew.” The reason the pipeline was blown up was that the United States was afraid “that Germany would lift the sanctions because of a cold winter.” Terrorism expert Peter Neumann rated Hersh’s article as implausible.
Poland and Ukraine may have had a motive similar to that assumed by Hersh. The common basis for such speculation is the assumption that these countries trust the Federal Republic to once again make common cause with Russia after the war – a consequence of decades of German Ostpolitik, which placed proximity to Moscow above the interests of the eastern EU partners.
What about Russia?
The New York Times writes that it is unclear what motive the Kremlin might have had for such an attack. However, possible Russian motives have been widely discussed. So it could be that Russia wanted to drive up energy prices in Europe. Another possibility is that the Kremlin wanted to make the break with the West irreversible. And finally, it is conceivable that Putin wanted to use the action to demonstrate to the West how vulnerable pipelines are. So wrote Russian oil company Gazprom Neft’s former strategy chief Sergey Vakulenko said the blasts coincided with the inauguration of another Baltic Sea pipeline carrying Norwegian gas to Poland.
As with the USA, Ukraine or Poland, these are only potential motives and not indications of Russian involvement. According to the New York Times, the United States has no evidence of the Russian government being involved.
Peter Neumann told RTL and ntv that it was apparently a professionally planned operation that probably had “a state connection”. That does not necessarily mean that a state is the client, “but possibly groups that may be close to a state”.
Can a “false flag” operation be ruled out?
False flag operations deliberately leave traces to mislead investigators and the public. According to the newspaper “Zeit”, the German authorities do not rule out that it should only appear as if the perpetrators came from Ukraine, but consider the probability to be low. According to the ARD, “international security circles” do not rule out that it could also be a “false flag” operation. However, “apparently” no evidence was found that would confirm such a scenario.
How would Western governments deal with it if they had evidence that Russia was behind the attack?
Danish military analyst Anders Puck Nielsen thinks it is likely that Russia was behind the Nord Stream attack. Even if one does not share this assumption, his further considerations are interesting: He does not find it surprising that Western states do not want to talk about Russian involvement. Russia is already waging a hybrid war against the West, says Nielsen on his YouTube channel. The aim of this hybrid warfare is to spread fear and insecurity in Western countries so that the mood against Ukraine tilts. Nielsen argues that in this situation it would be counterproductive for Western politicians to speak openly about Russian operations. “If they make a big deal out of a hybrid attack, then they would only be doing the attacker a favor.”