Politics

[Hunter4752001]

I suspect it will be quite some time, if ever, before we know who was responsible for the pipeline sabotage. Just my 2c worth:

1. Many commentators have voiced the conclusion that only a State actor could have accomplished this. While I think a State actor is likely, I would not rule out a private operator. A friend of mine (now retired) used to operate a commercial deep sea repair/maintenance/decommissioning company specifically contracted by the oil & gas industry. Both he and most of his crews were ex-special forces. In an industry were money is no object, they had all the equipment required and the skill sets to use it in any circumstances. He may be retired but there are a number of similar outfits servicing the industry.

2. If looking at nations, I doubt that the US and Russia were the only ones with the capability. In fact I would expect that any of the nations bordering the Baltic Sea would have the capability, after all it's their backyard and they would need to cover all potential circumstances.

3. I doubt that any US planner would have approved of the op, if for no other reason than the fear that they couldn't keep it secret. No matter how tight you keep it, people talk. Would you bet your career that Brandon wouldn't mis-speak on global TV or that a retired operator wouldn't rush out to get book & film rights etc?

4. In many ways Putin warned of this with his rhetoric about unleashing drastic outcomes on Europe if they continued to support Ukraine. Freezing through a European winter would fit that threat and the countries that emerged at the end of winter would face huge pressures to back off. I also note that Nord Stream 2 hadn't yet been activated, and Nord Stream1 was closed down "for maintenance" which meant that the demolition would not have affected the Russian equipment at the pumping end.

The above points are little more than speculation. Who ever did this won't have been in the business of leaving calling cards.

 

[WAB]

I agree with your point on private operators. Industry support services could absolutely have provided deep sea access to these lines. Combined with appropriate explosives expertise, the job could have been accomplished privately.

For me the water is still murky on a motive. I feel we are grasping at straws, be it Russia, German, USA, etc.. There is a piece of the puzzle missing.

 

[Hogpatrol]

 

[shootist~]

Is Red Adair's old outfit still operating?

 

[Alistair]

I agree with your point on private operators. Industry support services could absolutely have provided deep sea access to these lines. Combined with appropriate explosives expertise, the job could have been accomplished privately.

For me the water is still murky on a motive. I feel we are grasping at straws, be it Russia, German, USA, etc.. There is a piece of the puzzle missing.

I guess if we open the floor to private contractor involvement, the obvious suspect is a Ukrainian actor.

They've removed a major Russian bargaining chip that could be used as leverage to potentially get NATO states to back off on funding this war.

Say 20 or 30 million spent by Ukraine or a rich Ukrainian citizen to do this would pay substantial dividends in the funding of their war effort.

 

[WAB]

Is Red Adair's old outfit still operating?

Yeah but different skill set.

 

[WAB]

Is Red Adair's old outfit still operating?

Yeah but different skill set.

 

[steve white]

I don't get the connection here. Is the popular theory that investors around the world somehow know the truth and are comfortable with the idea of the USA sabotaging the pipeline?

I still favor the alien experiment idea. It seems to fit with the way things have been over the last few years. Explains it all actually.

I was leaning toward filming mishap of new James Bond movie...lol

 

[cpr0312]

 

[Wheels]

 

[Wheels]

 

[WAB]

View attachment 492407

One of the greatest minds of the modern age. Can you imagine what their pub discussions must have been like!?

 

[Vintageguy]

View attachment 492410

Not that different from our ruling elites. Just an observation.

 

[Kevin Peacocke]

It was a fanatical greens group who wants everyone to reduce their energy requirement and carbon footprint.

 

[Kevin Peacocke]

It was a fanatical greens group who wants everyone to reduce their energy requirement and carbon footprint.

Where was that shrieking dwarf at the time the pipes went up?

 

[marksman]

I’m afraid that we have very little common ground for discussion on this issue, other than we are both sickened by the loss of innocent lives.

Please understand that to most Americans, posting a picture of George Floyd next to a photo of fallen heroes is not well received.

l apologise if the meme l posted triggered anyone, l find it abhorrent as well
l went back to it to edit it to take it down but cant as the edit button is not available
l know you and everyone else understands that the meme is about the contempt and disrespect of the American president and not anything about comparing George Floyd to fallen American heroes

 

[Pondoro]

Gentlemen, we are in a hybrid war with Russia.. In 2013 Russia announced a new military doctrine...the most interesting part of this was hybrid war..the doctrine was penned by the chief of the russian general staff, Valerij Gerasimov. He still holds this position. The annexation of Crimea in 2014 with soldiers without insignia etc. was the first time Putin played out this new military doctrine full scale..

Gerasimov doctrine - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Note the Non - Military action of the doctrine..

Now, the Nordstream 1 and 2 was blown up THE SAME NIGHT before Norway´s minister of oil and energy officially opened the new Baltic Pipe that will supply gas to Poland from Norway via Denmark..

The new Baltic Pipe crosses the Nordstream lines at a point..

The Nordstreams have 0 value since Europe declared no more purchase of russian gas..

This is most likely a warning from Russia that they can take out the gas supply to Europe. We have 8800km of gas pipelines in the North Sea that are very difficult to protect..

Norway supply gas to Poland, Germany, the Netherlands, France and UK. All these nations have considerable naval capabilities and need to secure their gas import..

Lets see what happens..and do not belive the russian propaganda nonsense..

 

[VertigoBE]

Would love to discuss this with these people. There is no way that enough politicians and leaders of the financial sector could have been aware of this without it immediately leaking. The loonies and Tucker are having a field day, but serious commentators aren't coming to that conclusion. And I am fairly certain every news agency in the West didn't sign a non-disclosure agreement.

The consensus among those people whom I know and with whom I dialogue is that was another Russian miscalculation. Severing the pipelines was anticipated to cause an enormous outburst of anger against the pro-Ukrainian governments in NATO. Obviously it has not occurred. It would also be an implicit threat against other trans national lines and disarm, to some extent, anti-war elements in the Kremlin.

Secondly, this really isn't our style. Use the CIA or the military to overthrow an unfriendly government - sure. But to take an action like this which could rip apart NATO? I would have to see absolute proof.

More importantly, there was no need from the US perspective. The gas was already shut off. Europe was successfully garnering adequate supplies. No European government was truly threatened by an anti-Ukraine movement with the possible exception of Germany.

Finally, the economic argument (proposed in a couple of other posts) is ridiculous. Every cubic millimeter of US natural gas is sold - months, even years in the future. We can rest assured there are no plans to increase that production for some little while. Hence there is no market for a surge in US natural gas because there will not be one.

I am leaning more toward the Russians. Second would be Germany. Third would be aliens. US is a distant fourth.

For your evening entertainment, a bit of schadenfreude from my favorite Russian propogandist. If those darn troops would just fight according to regulations.

https://www.reddit.com/r/UkrainianConflict/comments/xri482

I should have perhaps added the disclaimer that my statements should not be seen as anything other than speculation as well.

Indeed, none of the people I spoke to, "know the truth". However for people who have positions on energy markets totalling in the multiple billions of euro's, they better get market signals right.

So I'll just repeat the facts we do know:
- Russia has been fighting for years to get Nordstream 1 & 2 online. It's their baby for many years, to get around having to export through Ukraine.
- Russia puts the gas on the pipe, so if they did not want to export using these pipes, they just don't pump any gas in it.
- NS1&2 being out, means that either LNG has to come from abroad (from the US for the most part lately) if there is no agreement on the Ukraine question. Or if there would be an agreement between EU/Ukraine/Russia, the gas would need to be pumped via Ukraine pipe like it was in the past.
- markets reacted barely to the news. Not having the gas come through NS1 was already priced in a few months ago. Nothing changes to the balance for this winter. So any veiled threat by Russia on the other pipelines, completely missed its mark (there is something to be said for the collective hidden intelligence of free markets that have a habit of making predictions quite accurately)

So the potential suspects are
1. Russia
2. Europe (or rather one or more specific countries within the EU)
3. US
4. Ukraine with the help of private contractors.
5. Aliens/the Kraken did it

For Russia, with the above facts in mind, the only possible reason for them to do so, is to make a veiled threat towards Norwegian pipelines. But why execute on their own pipe, make everyone and their grandmother alert on the possibility and therefore make the next try on other pipes that much harder? They already brought deliveries via the Nordstream 1 pipe down to zero. This veiled threat however had zero increased risk premium on gas, while it should. It could be however that markets are just broken by now, and do not know anymore what is up and down (real possibility).

The EU, I believe someone mentioned that only France/Germany/UK have such capability, they could have done it as a "burning bridges" kind of play. A big middle finger to Putin, to show him that there is no way Russia will ever be able to profit easily from their gas sales to Europe again. It makes a lot of sense for some EU actors to have done it. But if this winter people are freezing in their homes and it gets out that some government on the national level, or decided in Brussels on the EU level, in the former we will see those national governments go down from public outcry, while in the latter the European Union risks being fractured permanently.

The US, burning bridges for Europe, forcing Europe to no longer muddle along, but actually get hard on Russia and provide more military assistance, etc. Meanwhile they would profit from higher LNG sales (not only to Europe, but overall the LNG market would remain tight for many more years, so any volume of LNG would be higher priced in the coming years, in the absence of NS1&2). I'm sure however they would not have done so without silent agreement from at least France and Germany. I do agree with you @Red Leg, it does not look like typical modus operandi from the US. However, perhaps Biden (or someone in his administration) forced such a drastic operation.

The Ukraine, while not having the capabilities themselves, could have hired some private contractor to do so. A charming theory, as they have the most to gain of all from the destruction of those two pipelines. However, like with the US, this would have only been executed with silent approval from 1 or more mayor EU countries. Doing so without EU approval, could alienate the Ukrainian cause with EU countries/governments. And even with approval, if the people in the street would suspect the Ukraine to be behind this, this would not be liked by most.

Aliens/the Kraken, sure.

V.

 

[Red Leg]

I should have perhaps added the disclaimer that my statements should not be seen as anything other than speculation as well.

Indeed, none of the people I spoke to, "know the truth". However for people who have positions on energy markets totalling in the multiple billions of euro's, they better get market signals right.

So I'll just repeat the facts we do know:
- Russia has been fighting for years to get Nordstream 1 & 2 online. It's their baby for many years, to get around having to export through Ukraine.
- Russia puts the gas on the pipe, so if they did not want to export using these pipes, they just don't pump any gas in it.
- NS1&2 being out, means that either LNG has to come from abroad (from the US for the most part lately) if there is no agreement on the Ukraine question. Or if there would be an agreement between EU/Ukraine/Russia, the gas would need to be pumped via Ukraine pipe like it was in the past.
- markets reacted barely to the news. Not having the gas come through NS1 was already priced in a few months ago. Nothing changes to the balance for this winter. So any veiled threat by Russia on the other pipelines, completely missed its mark (there is something to be said for the collective hidden intelligence of free markets that have a habit of making predictions quite accurately)

So the potential suspects are
1. Russia
2. Europe (or rather one or more specific countries within the EU)
3. US
4. Ukraine with the help of private contractors.
5. Aliens/the Kraken did it

For Russia, with the above facts in mind, the only possible reason for them to do so, is to make a veiled threat towards Norwegian pipelines. But why execute on their own pipe, make everyone and their grandmother alert on the possibility and therefore make the next try on other pipes that much harder? They already brought deliveries via the Nordstream 1 pipe down to zero. This veiled threat however had zero increased risk premium on gas, while it should. It could be however that markets are just broken by now, and do not know anymore what is up and down (real possibility).

The EU, I believe someone mentioned that only France/Germany/UK have such capability, they could have done it as a "burning bridges" kind of play. A big middle finger to Putin, to show him that there is no way Russia will ever be able to profit easily from their gas sales to Europe again. It makes a lot of sense for some EU actors to have done it. But if this winter people are freezing in their homes and it gets out that some government on the national level, or decided in Brussels on the EU level, in the former we will see those national governments go down from public outcry, while in the latter the European Union risks being fractured permanently.

The US, burning bridges for Europe, forcing Europe to no longer muddle along, but actually get hard on Russia and provide more military assistance, etc. Meanwhile they would profit from higher LNG sales (not only to Europe, but overall the LNG market would remain tight for many more years, so any volume of LNG would be higher priced in the coming years, in the absence of NS1&2). I'm sure however they would not have done so without silent agreement from at least France and Germany. I do agree with you @Red Leg, it does not look like typical modus operandi from the US. However, perhaps Biden (or someone in his administration) forced such a drastic operation.

The Ukraine, while not having the capabilities themselves, could have hired some private contractor to do so. A charming theory, as they have the most to gain of all from the destruction of those two pipelines. However, like with the US, this would have only been executed with silent approval from 1 or more mayor EU countries. Doing so without EU approval, could alienate the Ukrainian cause with EU countries/governments. And even with approval, if the people in the street would suspect the Ukraine to be behind this, this would not be liked by most.

Aliens/the Kraken, sure.

V.

Good analysis except the supposed LNG pricing windfall for the US. There is no “US“ with respect LNG prices - there are large multi-national corporations who will benefit if prices do indeed increase, but the US government doesn’t benefit except indirectly from a tax and permit perspective. As I noted earlier, there will be no corresponding major increase in US production, at least under this administration. Perhaps Chevron et al have become Borgia’s and are fighting their own mercantile war.

But yes, the general lack of reaction is striking and more so by the day. If you are correct, and this was indeed a joint US/EU/NATO decision, then I am impressed. This reflects a level of political and military ruthlessness I would never have expected. Probably why I will continue to have trouble crediting it until actual evidence is forthcoming.

 

[VertigoBE]

Good analysis except the supposed LNG pricing windfall for the US. There is no “US“ with respect LNG prices - there are large multi-national corporations who will benefit if prices do indeed increase, but the US government doesn’t benefit except indirectly from a tax and permit perspective. As I noted earlier, there will be no corresponding major increase in US production, at least under this administration. Perhaps Chevron et al have become Borgia’s and are fighting their own mercantile war.

But yes, the general lack of reaction is striking and more so by the day. If you are correct, and this was indeed a joint US/EU/NATO decision, then I am impressed. This reflects a level of political and military ruthlessness I would never have expected. Probably why I will continue to have trouble crediting it until actual evidence is forthcoming.

I would not necessarily put it as an immediate short term windfall for the US (companies), but rather that one big geographical offtaker of gas (Europe), until these pipes get repaired, will be obligated to keep up a high rate of LNG cargoes as part of their supply.

In energy everything has to be looked at on the basis of decades, not price spikes for a year or so. Ensuring that in the future there will be a sustained high level need for LNG, means investment decisions now can pay off in the long run. What the US shale oil/gas industry most needs (apart from government getting out of their way) is long term financing. This financing can only happen if forecasts show many years of higher oil and higher gas prices.

Put it differently, some of the most cost competitive and vast resources of natural gas suddenly has been taken out of the supply side of the equation. (they could still export via Ukraine, but in current context unlikely) Until Russia builds a massive new pipeline to Asia, that gas is not going anywhere. Less supply for future years, means on average higher gas prices worldwide, and can pull certain investment decisions for the US over the marginal cost of production.

On top of that, as @Kevin Peacocke mentioned tongue in cheek that "the greenies did it", sustained higher prices for gas, will mean more investment into renewable technologies as an alternative. So it plays into the hands of the green extremists.

Anyway, still all speculation.

However the Russians have announced that they would like to start repairing the damage (through the Nord Stream AG company) as soon as they receive the official permit to go investigate. We should know more in about 2 weeks time.