Sweden’s domestic security agency said Thursday that its initial probe into the leaks in the Nord Stream natural gas pipelines has “strengthened the suspicions of serious sabotage.”
A Swedish prosecutor said that evidence had been seized from the area in the Baltic Sea where the leaks took place and that it will now be examined. “Seizures have been made at the crime scene and these will now be investigated,” said prosecutor Mats Ljungqvist.
At this point, there’s little doubt that the incident was the result of an attack, which was affirmed by Sweden’s Security Service. The security agency said the initial inquiry found that “detonations” caused extensive damage to Nord Stream 1 and Nord Stream 2, according to The Associated Press.
While the Swedish authorities are investigating the leaks, the operators of the pipelines that connect Russia to Germany have said Swedish and Danish authorities won’t allow them to inspect the damage until after an investigation or until they acquire permits. The explosions took place in international waters but within the Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZ) of Sweden and Denmark.
Germany’s federal police, the BKA, also said this week that the leaks were the result of an attack, likely carried out by a state actor. “Against the background of the high complexity of the execution of the act and corresponding preparation, the action of state actors seems probable,” the BKA said, according to Spiegel.
It’s not clear at this point who was behind the attacks, but the US certainly has the motive, as it has long tried to stop Nord Stream 2. Secretary of State Antony Blinken described the incident as a “tremendous opportunity” to wean Europe off Russian gas, and President Biden had previously threatened to put “an end” to Nord Stream 2.
27 thoughts on “Swedish Probe of Nord Stream Leaks Points to ‘Serious Sabotage’”
The odds that what is it 4 explosions occur in a day pretty minimal, it goes without saying that is was sabotage. Want do bet we find some empty vodka bottles on the seafloor next to the pin-line, plus maybe some wrenches with Cyrillic markings.
It doesn’t matter what they find … they could find Putin’s driver’s license and a “Russia was here” sign, and the AW crowd will say it was planted by the US.
If they found that I would agree.
OK, true, haha! That would be a tad suspect. But my point is that there is literally NO evidence that would ever convince most of the posters here. If it was very solid, it would be “too good” and have been planted. If it was subtle, they’d say, “Well, that doesn’t prove anything!”
I don’t think the Russians did it, they own the tap, and they own the expensive pipeline, unless the damage is nominal and easily repaired I don’t think they would blow up a billions dollar asset that they own. OTOH I can’t believe the US did it, the consequences should they get caught… So I just dunno maybe the Poles they owe Russia a favor and it forces Russian gas into Polish pipelines so win win from their perspective.
There’s no shortage of corporations, including mercenaries, with the ability to construct underwater drones capable of planting sufficient explosives (the estimate that I’ve seen is 100 kilos each blast site) from a nearby island, and they’d LOVE to be able to sell gas to the EU. Additionally there are steerable depth charges, similar to ‘smart bombs’, that can be dropped off a passing ship. Since the pipeline is only inspected annually they could have been planted months ago. Protests in Germany have been breaking out, people are trying to force the politicians to turn the pipelines back on before winter starts.
I seriously doubt that commoners like us will ever learn what actually happened though.
I think Russia looks good for it, though I’m open to other ideas. Germany refused to certify Nord Stream 2, which was a huge loss of face for Russia politically. And Gazprom has longterm contracts that they can be sued for failing to fulfill. German energy company Uniper was already considering legal action against Gazprom for billions of euros.
So Russia couldn’t just cut off the flow of gas without major financial repercussions to Gazprom, which is majority state owned. And gas prices are now soaring, so Russia is getting a windfall from the gas they ARE still able to sell, while simultaneously panicking the EU further about energy supplies and undermining support for Ukraine. And how very convenient it is that one line from Nord Stream two was left undamaged and they CAN deliver gas through it after all!
“OTOH I can’t believe the US did it, the consequences should they get caught.”
That’s funny. Like all the consequences they’ve faced for “getting caught”? No WMD’s? No Problem, just change your story to “defending Iraqi freedom”. No sanctions. No international uproar. No nothing. And that’s just Iraq. So why on earth would we care if we got caught?
Besides, Joe Biden, in a rare moment of lucidity, said we were going to stop the pipeline. No one seems to take his admissions of guilt seriously.
“… my point is that there is literally NO evidence that would ever convince most of the posters here.”
Not true, Lemony. Speaking for myself, if someone provides evidence — by which I mean genuine evidence — I will accept what it shows.
The problem is that there is nothing resembling genuine evidence that anyone other than the US and its NATO “helpers” did it. The US has said flat out, multiple times, that it would end NS2. The US had means, motive, and opportunity. Regarding opportunity in particular, a full US naval contingent with the precise skill set required had been swarming over the area just before the sabotage.
By comparison, while Russia had the means in terms of technical capability, those means were constrained by the substantial surveillance capabilities of the local Baltic states. Those same surveillance constraints also limited Russia’s opportunities. But most tellingly, Russia had maximum motive to preserve the NS pipeline assets and zero motive to blow them up.
I understand that you don’t like being “slapped around”. While you’re certainly welcome here — you get my vote at least — if you come here and stubbornly parrot US/UK/neocon/MIC talking points, there are no two ways about it, you are gonna get schooled.
Anyway, it’s up to you.
It’s cute that you that you 1) think you’re “slapping me around” or “schooling me” in any way and 2) believe you have the authority to tell me that I’m “welcome here.”
I’m surprised you haven’t blamed the Jews. Based on your posting history, you seem to think that they’re responsible for pretty much everything.
Obviously you can’t handle adult behavior, adult discourse. I gave you a chance, but you prefer to “skip school”.
If you’re under the impression that your own behavior or discourse is mature, let me disabuse you of that notion.
That sh*t works both ways.
Likely they’ll opt for the same evasion as the IAEA ‘investigation’ on the provenance of the attacks on the Zaporizhia nuclear generating facility.
“Swedish Probe of Nord Stream Leaks Points to ‘Serious Sabotage’”
duh. they registered explosions on their richter scales even though the pipeline is on the sea floor.
Who will be allowed to see “the evidence”?
The Swedes are totally aligned with the US Deep State … so the fix is in.
In 2014 the Swedes found an ROV with explosives attached “near Line 2 of the Nord Stream Natural Gas offshore pipeline system”.
But they didn’t allow anyone to inspect the evidence then, and I doubt they will allow it now. The fix is in.
We will see.
A more interesting question: How will the US deal with the still undamaged line B of NS2?
So you’re suggesting that the US was willing to conduct environmental terrorism in the exclusive economic zone of one NATO ally (Denmark) to destroy billions of dollars of property of another NATO ally (Germany), after warning Germany weeks before.
Personally, I disagree with the use of both “environmental” and “terrorism”. The environmental thing is very PC. But militarily, the methane release was not so much intentional as unavoidable. And as no persons were injured or killed, “terrorism” seems hyperbolic, a bit sensational but not really applicable.
In terms more dispassionately descriptive, I see it as a “kinetic” military attack in the context of the larger war. In this, the Nordstream pipeline case, we see an economic attack. An attack on an adversary’s vital economic asset. Differing from the economic sanctions “attacks” in that it employs overt military-style violence.
So, yes, I see that “the US was willing to conduct [an attack] in the exclusive economic zone of one NATO ally (Denmark) to destroy billions of dollars of property of another NATO ally (Germany), after warning Germany weeks before.”
Starting to look like plane being shot by an exciteable Ukrainian military thinking it was Russian plane. But no investigation was open to examination, and that was that,
In today’s reality — nobody in the world would believe should their investigation point finger at Russia. The investigation really is conducted to clean up the site.
I do nor know in what grounds they can prohibit pipeline operator to investigate. Whose permission is neded? It was claimed that the explosions were in INTERNATIONAL waters.
Of course, unless it is not so. If the blasts were in Danmark’s extended ecoonomic zone (UNCLOS definition), US may have a problem, US is not UNCLOS signatory, and insists on violating other countries’ extended economic zones. UNCLOS laws in extended economic zone allows for free commercial shipping, but requires military vessels to announce ahead of time the intent of passing through in the basis of “innocent right of passage”. This is claimed usuly by navies sailing through in a more direct line. However, US refuses to notify countries iof the intent, Recently India got a rebuke for questioning US warship passage through its EEZ.
By Danmark asking for a permit is a bizzare position. It is not a bew project and the original permit to.build hd to have included the right to maintain and prriodic examination. as well as any urgent intervention.
This will all come out in due course. It is Russia and Germany that are tge parties to suffer damage. To exude them is absurd.
No doubt. But which US proxy did it? That is the only serious question to be answered by anyone seeking the truth of this.
Of course, the West is deeply invested in avoiding the truth. It is a pattern, and this is likely to be just one more until the truth leaks out.
Comments are closed.