Photo provided by the Danish Defense Command shows the Nord Stream 2 gas leak near Bornholm from the air.
(Photo: dpa)
The story about the blowing up of the Nord Stream pipelines really has everything a good story needs: Agent magic with a James Bond character, a war in which Ukraine heroically defends itself against the overpowering and imperialist aggressor from Moscow. And the whole thing against the backdrop of big world politics, that is to say, the epochal conflict between the declining world power USA, the declining world power Russia and their protecting power: the aspiring world power China.
Somewhere in between there is still a small, insecure Europe, whose leading economic power, Germany, is hopelessly bogged down with its pipeline connection to Russia – politically, strategically, economically, even morally. And finally watched as the symbol of this dissipation was blown up on the seabed with the pipelines.
Well, credit where credit is due: The colleagues from the “New York Times”, ARD and Die Zeit have researched many and sometimes surprising details of exactly what happened on the bottom of the Baltic Sea. However, the whole truth also includes: We are much smarter than before neither – at least not as far as the crucial question of who is behind the blasting of the pipelines is concerned.
It is said to have been a “pro-Ukrainian group”. However, half the world could be hiding behind it: the usual suspects USA and Great Britain as well as Ukraine itself and all Western supporters who have the technical prerequisites for such an act of sabotage on the seabed.
The research also does not rule out a “false flag” action by Russian secret services, which could well have an interest in blaming Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.
Joe Biden’s undiplomatic announcement
The big question remains who is benefiting from the spectacular action on the seabed. But this too is unclear. Example USA: Even before the start of the Russian invasion, President Joe Biden had announced in an undiplomatic manner in the presence of the Federal Chancellor that he would end the Nord Stream problem if Putin’s soldiers invaded Ukraine. Olaf Scholz himself, who at the time still wanted the pipeline to be understood as a “private-sector project”, did not see himself in a position to make this threat.
But even the theory that the Americans are behind it, as claimed by the world-famous US investigative reporter Seymour Hersh, citing an anonymous source, is not really convincing. The Nord Stream project had long since been completed when the blasting took place at the end of September. Then why take this risk?
Read here: A pipeline through the Mediterranean could bring new natural gas to Europe
The current revelations are at best the basis for further research. Of course, the question arises as to what it means for the complex network of relationships if the trace that has now been researched to the Ukrainian government should be confirmed. All those Western supporters of Ukraine in the West who always view Zelenskiy with a certain skepticism should feel vindicated – and possibly question their involvement in arms deliveries.
Perhaps the most important lesson from the entire process, however, is that hasty conclusions should be avoided, especially with such a geopolitically charged story that invites conspiracy theories.
More: After the Nord Stream attack: How Germany wants to protect its maritime infrastructure with high-tech.