Who benefits from sabotage in the Baltic? Russian, Ukrainian experts share their opinions

The last week of September started with a mysterious story, which provokes question after question and instead of at least a couple of accurate and unequivocal answers, only various versions and motives are put forward. We are talking, of course, about explosions that happened practically on the same day at two Baltic pipelines - Nord Stream 1 (NSP1) and Nord Stream 2 (NSP2).

The first underwater explosion occurred on Sunday night, on the Swedish section of Nord Stream 2. The Swedish National Seismic Network (SNSN) says there was a second explosion the same evening, on the Danish section. And the news that ruptures had been found on all three branches of the Nord Stream 1 and 2 pipelines left no one in any doubt that it was sabotage. Other versions are practically ruled out, at least the European governments are already investigating what happened as an act of sabotage. The fact is that seismologists detected powerful explosions at the ruptured gas pipeline, which virtually rules out the version of an accident. The day after the incidents, SNSN specialists announced that they are sure that the explosions took place. The magnitude of the explosions on the Richter scale was 1.9 and 2.3. "You can clearly see the waves bouncing off the bottom towards the surface. There is no doubt that these were explosions," said SNSN seismologist Björn Lund.

Nord Stream AG said that the simultaneous destruction of three gas lines in the Baltic Sea is unprecedented and it is not yet possible to estimate the timing of the restoration of the gas transport infrastructure. European officials are also talking about a case of sabotage. According to Danish and Polish authorities, the blasts were caused by premeditation and subversion. Danish Climate and Energy Minister Dan Jorgensen confirmed the geologists' information that it was the explosions that occurred at the gas pipelines, stressing that the pipes are deep at the bottom and made of steel and concrete, and the size of the leaks indicates that it could not be an accident, for example, due to a ship's anchor.

Nor does Swedish Foreign Minister Ann Linde believe in an accident. "The gas leak on Nord Stream 1 and Nord Stream 2 in the exclusive economic zones of Denmark and Sweden was the result of explosions, probably caused by sabotage," she wrote on social networks. Polish Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki echoed her, saying that there was an act of sabotage.

"Preliminary data indicate that this could have been the result of an attack or sabotage of some kind, although this has not yet been confirmed. But if this is confirmed, it is definitely not in the interests of either side," US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken contributed to the discussion about the incident. The sabotage is also indicated by the Tagesspiegel newspaper, which, citing a source close to the investigation, writes that the attack on the gas pipeline is a non—trivial task, and could have been carried out either with the help of combat divers of special operations forces or by submarine.

Meanwhile, almost no one officially declares who exactly committed the sabotage in Europe, but there are two basic assumptions with possible motives - Ukraine and Russia. For example, the same Tagesspiegel reports that both versions are being considered in the preliminary investigation, the first being an operation by Ukrainian or Ukrainian-affiliated forces: in the event of a complete and lasting failure of Nord Stream, gas supplies from Russia to Europe could either come through the Polish part of the Yamal-Europe pipeline (but it has long been under sanctions) or through the Ukrainian gas transportation system. The second version is a Russian "false flag" operation designed to increase uncertainty and exacerbate the European energy crisis.

As we can see, many European countries are inclined to think that the explosions were premeditated, but the question is who could benefit from sabotage in the Baltic so much that its organizers dared to do such a technologically complex task?

Igor Yushkov, analyst of the Russian Energy Security Fund and expert of the Financial University under the RF government; Vasily Koltashov, director of the Institute of New Society, Russian economist; as well as Alexander Merezhko, chairman of the Ukrainian Parliamentary Committee on Foreign Policy and Interparliamentary Cooperation and vice president of PACE, and Yevhen Magda, director of the World Politics Institute (Kyiv) tried to answer Caliber.Az's question.

On the whole, the opinions of Russian experts do not differ much. Both experts believe that the sabotage of the Nord Stream pipeline is beneficial for the United States.

Yushkov believes that the explosions on the Baltic are nothing but a terrorist act: "Europeans use the word 'sabotage', but sabotage is a completely different thing, and here we are faced with outright sabotage and an act of international terrorism. No one doubts that it was an external influence. The versions about the pipeline being damaged by an anchor of a passing ship and so on are just nonsense. It is impossible to damage three gas pipelines in different places with an anchor".

The expert warns that now all sides will start to trade accusations: "Europe and the US will, understandably, blame Russia, although why it would blow up its own pipeline is completely unclear. Not so long ago they were saying that the purpose of Russian energy policy was to force Europe to launch Nord Stream 2, but now they claim Russia blew up the pipeline itself. Earlier, the US claimed that Russia was fighting in Ukraine, among other things, to discredit Ukrainian transit and force Europe to launch NSP2. So why should we blow it up if we want to launch it? The Germans do not benefit from it either, as they were happy with the status quo. Despite the fact that the pipeline did not work, it was theoretically possible to launch it at any time (during the crisis, the heating season). And now it turns out that Europe was left without a safety net. It is true, one of the lines of NSP2 is sort of intact and holds certain pressure, but from now on the opponents of the launch of this pipeline will be constantly pointing at the fact that it is not safe after the explosion".

Russia is generally interested in getting to the site of the incidents as soon as possible and seeing what is wrong with the second line of NSP2, Yushkov believes. However, it is still unclear, he said, how Denmark and Russia would cooperate in this case. It is possible that Denmark will create obstacles on various pretexts and not allow Russia to study so that it suddenly did not find any evidence.

He concludes: "It turns out that Russia and Germany do not benefit from this, but the US does. Washington thus signals that it has the power to destroy any Russian infrastructure. The US does not give a damn about European interests, if it is necessary to deprive Russia of gas export revenues, they will do so. The US has already hinted at this. The head of the White House, Joe Biden, has openly declared that if Russia starts military actions against Ukraine, there will be no NSP2. He even threatened that he would find a way to achieve it. Therefore, I think that the USA is rather interested in this, they are thus cutting Russia off from Europe in terms of energy cooperation and forcing the Europeans to cooperate only with America."

Economist Koltashov also recalled Biden's promise to rid the EU of the NSP.

"In fact, this is what we are witnessing," the expert commented on the incident. - The USA, of course, did not take responsibility for the terrorist attack on the gas pipeline, but the American president announced this crime. Therefore, there are no questions here. Obviously, in accordance with the principle of Roman law - look for who benefits – the one who benefits, named himself. The United States is not only interested in the EU buying American gas, but also in ensuring that the economic downturn that is unfolding in the West will largely fall on the EU economy. So that American industrial enterprises, trading firms, and banks suffered minimally, and their problems and losses were compensated by a panic flow of capital from the EU and England, and along with this, industrial production and the middle strata of the EU collapsed. And if Germany is left without gas as a result of these terrorist attacks and further sabotage of the pipeline passing through Ukraine, which cannot be ruled out, then the reduction of production in the EU will benefit the US. Therefore, the interested party here is obvious and so are the consequences," Koltashov believes.

However, the Ukrainian side has a different opinion of what happened. Aleksandr Merezhko told Caliber.Az that gas pipeline explosions are beneficial to Russia.

"It is difficult to say what happened there, the incident needs a thorough professional investigation. At the same time, the ancient Romans asked a simple question in such cases: who benefits from it? In this case, it benefits Russia, which, especially now, is ready to go to any provocation," Merezhko said.

For his part, Yevhen Magda believes that Russia set off the gas pipeline explosions, thus trying to blackmail the West.

"I believe that the explosions on the Nord Stream pipeline are linked to Russia's desire to blackmail the whole world into cutting off gas supplies and to raise the stakes in the political-military game with NATO, which Moscow sees behind Ukraine's back. I want to stress that Russia sees NATO in Ukraine, even though we have no Alliance soldiers.

Putin is very much counting on "General Frost" to play on his side, but I think it will be a bit the other way around. The EU could do without Russian gas during the heating season and this would change relations between Russia and the EU forever. Russia would lose its image as a predictable and understandable partner. And it will lose a lot of revenues from selling its energy resources," Magda concluded.