4 ms·

The Russians blew up their own brand-new pipeline, which they spend billions creating (jointly with the Germans) and is one of the few major "hopes" to salvage

The Russians blew up their own brand-new pipeline, which they spend billions creating (jointly with the Germans) and is one of the few major "hopes" to salvage that relationship, especially as winter dawns. That's frankly absurd. Russia almost certainly sabotaged a LNG terminal in Texas a few months ago (industrial cyberattack). This act was almost certainly done by Washington or their proxies. It drives the wedge further between EU and Russia and makes the EU further dependent on Washington. The cui bono is pretty clear.

formerly_proven 4y ago
> That's frankly absurd. The notion that NS2 would enter operation is absurd. NS2 has been dead in the water for months, and the prospect of entering service have been dubious for some time before the Russians invaded Ukraine.
- pphysch 4y ago
  Washington had a very clear policy of never letting NS2 enter production (remember that ominous Biden quip before the war? [1]), which, by the way, is the opposite of absurd: Germany is a major consumer of natural gas and Russia is a major nearby supplier. NS2 is natural in a world without geopolitical drama. "NS2 shouldn't exist" is a narrative manufactured in Washington (and delivered to Germany by Baerbock), that goes against basic economics and the interests of both Germans and Russians. [1] - https://www.cnbc.com/2022/02/07/biden-says-nord-stream-2-wont-go-forward-if-russia-invades-ukraine-.html https://www.cnbc.com/2022/02/07/biden-says-nord-stream-2-won...
  - jcranmer 4y ago
    > NS2 is natural in a world without geopolitical drama. As I understand it, most of the gas that would be delivered via NS2 would be the gas that wouldn't be delivered through Belarus/Ukraine (depriving them of transit revenue and providing more options for Russia to employ gas politics on its western flank). It rather seems to me that, far from being natural in a world without geopolitical drama, much of its purpose is actually to enable geopolitical drama. And, of course, the main thrust of the argumentation against NS2 was that it was causing Germany to pursue an economic dependency on Russia that was unwise, given Russia's already-demonstrated penchant for using that economic dependency as a lever in global affairs. NS2 died when Russia's invasion of Ukraine demonstrated the lack of wisdom in pursuing economic dependency on Russia (compounded by Russia withholding gas flows to make Europe came back begging to Mother Russia).
    - pphysch 4y ago
      NS1 was in operation years before even the 2014 events in Ukraine.
      - jcranmer 4y ago
        Notice how I referred to NS2 and not NS1.
        pphysch 4y ago
        They use the same route. Your assertion that NS2 is somehow out-of-place and can only be explained by Russian "gas politics" is contradicted by the precedent set by NS1.
        mixedbit 4y ago
        Where is the contradiction? NS1 has limited capacity that was not sufficient to allow Russia to bypass Ukrainian gas pipelines, NS2 would increases the capacity of this route.
    - eshch 4y ago
      >depriving them of transit revenue So should Russia be obliged to pay for transit and provide gas to Ukraine? Why wouldn't Ukraine pursue gas supplies from other sources? It had at least 8 years for that, but all the time was spent on opposing NS2. "that was unwise" is a simplification, not a proper explanation. Russia is a cheap resource supplier, so it was beneficial for European countries to leverage it for their economy to be more competitive with US at least. Saudi Arabia has its own bunch of issues with democracy (there is none, imagine), human rights (surprise), a war with neighbouring Yemen (sounds familiar?), but for some magical reason no one cares and alienates Saudi Arabia, and everyone is very forgetful and blind about their issues and doesn't interfere. People's thoughts are literally tunnelled.
      - SpicyLemonZest 4y ago
        The key difference is that Saudi Arabia has not acquired new territory for itself. In the post-colonial era, there are very strong norms against countries annexing parts of each other, with Russia's actions in Ukraine being pretty much the first to happen since the 60s. If the Saudis had initiated the war in Yemen by pointing to some old border dispute and directly annexing the port of Aden, people would be much more angry with them. For comparison, consider Iraq's attempt to annex Kuwait in the 90s. The world absolutely considered it a five-alarm fire, with the West immediately planning for war and even China and the Soviet Union authorizing a retaliatory blockade. Most people genuinely and strongly feel that the return of territorial conquest as a common practice would be a disaster for the world.
  - epakai 4y ago
    It was Washington that waived sanctions in 2021 to allow NS2. It is only on Russian mobilization that the policy changed. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-57180674 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-57180674
- cameldrv 4y ago
  It's not absurd if NS1 were damaged. Even if Germany didn't want the extra capacity that NS2 brings, it's an obvious backup if NS1 were to fail. Anyone wanting to cut off the option of Russia supplying gas to Germany this winter would have to hit both.
FiberBundle 4y ago
It's really not that absurd. The fact that it looks entirely irrational for Russia to do this is exactly why they might have done it. Their intent is to cause division in the West. They could potentially hope for EU countries to blame the US or Ukraine for this. If you read Twitter trends you already see an army of Russian bots pushing the theory that the US has done this.
- pphysch 4y ago
  > The fact that it looks entirely irrational for Russia to do this is exactly why they might have done it. Any analysis predicated on "the enemy is perfectly irrational and will not act according their interests" is not analysis. It's untethered from reality, which is convenient, because you can support any conclusion you desire. Robert McNamara's #1 life lesson was "empathize with your enemy" (he dealt with the Cuban Missile Crisis). Sun Tzu said "If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles." This timeless wisdom has basis in reality. Unfortunately, realism in Washington has been replaced with insane, petulant ideologues like Victoria "Fuck the EU" Nuland" and Michael "Of course we lied" McFaul.
  - throwrqX 4y ago
    People like Michael McFaul is exactly why the invasion happened in the first place because the Obama admin was weak on Russia after the 2014 invasion. They are the opposite of ideologues.
    - pphysch 4y ago
      The Obama-Biden admins definitely induced the current crisis over Ukraine, but it certainly wasn't because they were too permissive.
      - yakshaving_jgt 4y ago
    - 4y ago
throwrqX 4y ago
I don't understand why people here seem to think Russia is acting rationally. The fact they continue the invasion when losing is clearly irrational. They threaten mass nuclear bombardment of Europe nearly daily. I don't see any long term rationality in Putin's government in the slightest. There will be no salvaging the relationship between Germany and Russia for a long time unless Putin gets replaced, even during winter. The absolute worst case scenario (the only one I see where Germany could have gone to Russia for gas) where people die from cold in their homes is never going to happen. Only yesterday BloombergNEF published a report saying Europe was ready for a complete cut off from Russian gas from October 1, and that includes commercial uses too which take up a big chunk and would obviously be redirected should there be any threat of people dying of cold. > Russia almost certainly sabotaged a LNG terminal in Texas a few months ago What evidence is there for this? > It drives the wedge further between EU and Russia On the contrary, should the EU find that the US was behind the explosions it would cause an absolute rift between the US-EU relationship, and in particular with Germany.
- christkv 4y ago
  Exaggerated threats is standard soviet negotiation and the current leadership of Russia are creatures of that culture of negotiation. Blowing up their own gas line makes no sense as it destroys any possible leverage. The only ones that have anything to gain is the US or other associated allies.
  - migro23 4y ago
    The pipelines represented zero leverage at this point. No gas was being supplied by them and it would be politically untenable for any European country to buy it using these pipelines while Putin is still in charge. So as far as Putin was concerned (not Russia) these pipelines have zero value.
- pphysch 4y ago
  > I don't understand Have you genuinely attempted to understand the Russian perspective in all this? Like listened to what Moscow has been saying for the last decade? Have you ever read a single one of Putin's speeches, for example? Reading Anne Applebaum screeds in The Atlantic is not seeking understanding, by the way. How can you understand something if you don't attempt to understand it? > What evidence is there for this? No smoking gun, just cui bono + timing + no other plausible explanation has been put forth > On the contrary, should the EU find that the US was behind the explosions it would cause an absolute rift between the US-EU relationship, and in particular with Germany. If Europe had strong leadership. Even Merkel didn't really stand up to the spying revelations. The nuclear brinkmanship is textbook deterrence. Whenever Russia escalates, expect nuclear threats to deter a full-blown NATO entry.
NeverFade 4y ago
> The Russians blew up their own brand-new pipeline, which they spend billions creating (jointly with the Germans) and is one of the few major "hopes" to salvage that relationship, especially as winter dawns. There is no "salvaging the relationship" for the current regime. No gas will flow in these pipelines while Putin is in power, and the EU has already prepared alternatives: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-09-27/europe-is-ready-for-a-winter-without-russian-gas-bnef-says https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-09-27/europe-is... Thus these pipelines are worthless to the current regime, except as means to cause damage to the hated Europeans who are enforcing sanctions against them and arming Ukraine against their invasion. You may argue that the relationship might be salvaged with the next regime, but Putin doesn't care. He will be dead or imprisoned for life whenever such next regime takes power.
- pphysch 4y ago
  The hope in Moscow is that the people of Germany, etc will rise up and democratically remove the Washington proxies (Grünen) from their governments. Then the relationship may be renewed.
  - gizajob 4y ago
    Ha. The vodka in Moscow must be pretty strong this year then.
  - mopsi 4y ago
    The German Greens have historically been very openly hostile towards the US and NATO. To call them Washington proxies is just plain stupid.
- greedo 4y ago
  I remember Tiananmen Square. People were horrified at the barbaric reaction of the PRC to peaceful protests. Thirty plus years later, they are one of the world's largest trading partners. Despite their barbaric treatment of the Uighars. So I don't believe that countries won't salvage their "relationship" with Russia given half a chance.
Paradigma11 4y ago
Pretty sure the repair can be done before there is any chance the sanctions would be lifted. So Russia doesnt really lose anything important but is able to sow discord, mistrust and generally raise the fear level about gas supply.
- pphysch 4y ago
  That's possible, albeit a very expensive prank with no guaranteed upside. Why not just keep the valve shut and pretend you have no interest in opening it?
  - Paradigma11 4y ago
    Because Russia needs to do "something" now to hopefully reduce arms and financial support for Ukraine and this is "something".

formerly_proven 4y ago

> That's frankly absurd. The notion that NS2 would enter operation is absurd. NS2 has been dead in the water for months, and the prospect of entering service have been dubious for some time before the Russians invaded Ukraine.

pphysch 4y ago
Washington had a very clear policy of never letting NS2 enter production (remember that ominous Biden quip before the war? [1]), which, by the way, is the opposite of absurd: Germany is a major consumer of natural gas and Russia is a major nearby supplier. NS2 is natural in a world without geopolitical drama. "NS2 shouldn't exist" is a narrative manufactured in Washington (and delivered to Germany by Baerbock), that goes against basic economics and the interests of both Germans and Russians. [1] - https://www.cnbc.com/2022/02/07/biden-says-nord-stream-2-wont-go-forward-if-russia-invades-ukraine-.html https://www.cnbc.com/2022/02/07/biden-says-nord-stream-2-won...
- jcranmer 4y ago
  > NS2 is natural in a world without geopolitical drama. As I understand it, most of the gas that would be delivered via NS2 would be the gas that wouldn't be delivered through Belarus/Ukraine (depriving them of transit revenue and providing more options for Russia to employ gas politics on its western flank). It rather seems to me that, far from being natural in a world without geopolitical drama, much of its purpose is actually to enable geopolitical drama. And, of course, the main thrust of the argumentation against NS2 was that it was causing Germany to pursue an economic dependency on Russia that was unwise, given Russia's already-demonstrated penchant for using that economic dependency as a lever in global affairs. NS2 died when Russia's invasion of Ukraine demonstrated the lack of wisdom in pursuing economic dependency on Russia (compounded by Russia withholding gas flows to make Europe came back begging to Mother Russia).
  - pphysch 4y ago
    NS1 was in operation years before even the 2014 events in Ukraine.
    - jcranmer 4y ago
      Notice how I referred to NS2 and not NS1.
      - pphysch 4y ago
        They use the same route. Your assertion that NS2 is somehow out-of-place and can only be explained by Russian "gas politics" is contradicted by the precedent set by NS1.
        mixedbit 4y ago
        Where is the contradiction? NS1 has limited capacity that was not sufficient to allow Russia to bypass Ukrainian gas pipelines, NS2 would increases the capacity of this route.
  - eshch 4y ago
    >depriving them of transit revenue So should Russia be obliged to pay for transit and provide gas to Ukraine? Why wouldn't Ukraine pursue gas supplies from other sources? It had at least 8 years for that, but all the time was spent on opposing NS2. "that was unwise" is a simplification, not a proper explanation. Russia is a cheap resource supplier, so it was beneficial for European countries to leverage it for their economy to be more competitive with US at least. Saudi Arabia has its own bunch of issues with democracy (there is none, imagine), human rights (surprise), a war with neighbouring Yemen (sounds familiar?), but for some magical reason no one cares and alienates Saudi Arabia, and everyone is very forgetful and blind about their issues and doesn't interfere. People's thoughts are literally tunnelled.
    - SpicyLemonZest 4y ago
      The key difference is that Saudi Arabia has not acquired new territory for itself. In the post-colonial era, there are very strong norms against countries annexing parts of each other, with Russia's actions in Ukraine being pretty much the first to happen since the 60s. If the Saudis had initiated the war in Yemen by pointing to some old border dispute and directly annexing the port of Aden, people would be much more angry with them. For comparison, consider Iraq's attempt to annex Kuwait in the 90s. The world absolutely considered it a five-alarm fire, with the West immediately planning for war and even China and the Soviet Union authorizing a retaliatory blockade. Most people genuinely and strongly feel that the return of territorial conquest as a common practice would be a disaster for the world.
- epakai 4y ago
  It was Washington that waived sanctions in 2021 to allow NS2. It is only on Russian mobilization that the policy changed. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-57180674 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-57180674
cameldrv 4y ago
It's not absurd if NS1 were damaged. Even if Germany didn't want the extra capacity that NS2 brings, it's an obvious backup if NS1 were to fail. Anyone wanting to cut off the option of Russia supplying gas to Germany this winter would have to hit both.

FiberBundle 4y ago

It's really not that absurd. The fact that it looks entirely irrational for Russia to do this is exactly why they might have done it. Their intent is to cause division in the West. They could potentially hope for EU countries to blame the US or Ukraine for this. If you read Twitter trends you already see an army of Russian bots pushing the theory that the US has done this.

pphysch 4y ago
> The fact that it looks entirely irrational for Russia to do this is exactly why they might have done it. Any analysis predicated on "the enemy is perfectly irrational and will not act according their interests" is not analysis. It's untethered from reality, which is convenient, because you can support any conclusion you desire. Robert McNamara's #1 life lesson was "empathize with your enemy" (he dealt with the Cuban Missile Crisis). Sun Tzu said "If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles." This timeless wisdom has basis in reality. Unfortunately, realism in Washington has been replaced with insane, petulant ideologues like Victoria "Fuck the EU" Nuland" and Michael "Of course we lied" McFaul.
- throwrqX 4y ago
  People like Michael McFaul is exactly why the invasion happened in the first place because the Obama admin was weak on Russia after the 2014 invasion. They are the opposite of ideologues.
  - pphysch 4y ago
    The Obama-Biden admins definitely induced the current crisis over Ukraine, but it certainly wasn't because they were too permissive.
    - yakshaving_jgt 4y ago
  - 4y ago

throwrqX 4y ago

I don't understand why people here seem to think Russia is acting rationally. The fact they continue the invasion when losing is clearly irrational. They threaten mass nuclear bombardment of Europe nearly daily. I don't see any long term rationality in Putin's government in the slightest. There will be no salvaging the relationship between Germany and Russia for a long time unless Putin gets replaced, even during winter. The absolute worst case scenario (the only one I see where Germany could have gone to Russia for gas) where people die from cold in their homes is never going to happen. Only yesterday BloombergNEF published a report saying Europe was ready for a complete cut off from Russian gas from October 1, and that includes commercial uses too which take up a big chunk and would obviously be redirected should there be any threat of people dying of cold. > Russia almost certainly sabotaged a LNG terminal in Texas a few months ago What evidence is there for this? > It drives the wedge further between EU and Russia On the contrary, should the EU find that the US was behind the explosions it would cause an absolute rift between the US-EU relationship, and in particular with Germany.

christkv 4y ago
Exaggerated threats is standard soviet negotiation and the current leadership of Russia are creatures of that culture of negotiation. Blowing up their own gas line makes no sense as it destroys any possible leverage. The only ones that have anything to gain is the US or other associated allies.
- migro23 4y ago
  The pipelines represented zero leverage at this point. No gas was being supplied by them and it would be politically untenable for any European country to buy it using these pipelines while Putin is still in charge. So as far as Putin was concerned (not Russia) these pipelines have zero value.
pphysch 4y ago
> I don't understand Have you genuinely attempted to understand the Russian perspective in all this? Like listened to what Moscow has been saying for the last decade? Have you ever read a single one of Putin's speeches, for example? Reading Anne Applebaum screeds in The Atlantic is not seeking understanding, by the way. How can you understand something if you don't attempt to understand it? > What evidence is there for this? No smoking gun, just cui bono + timing + no other plausible explanation has been put forth > On the contrary, should the EU find that the US was behind the explosions it would cause an absolute rift between the US-EU relationship, and in particular with Germany. If Europe had strong leadership. Even Merkel didn't really stand up to the spying revelations. The nuclear brinkmanship is textbook deterrence. Whenever Russia escalates, expect nuclear threats to deter a full-blown NATO entry.

NeverFade 4y ago

> The Russians blew up their own brand-new pipeline, which they spend billions creating (jointly with the Germans) and is one of the few major "hopes" to salvage that relationship, especially as winter dawns. There is no "salvaging the relationship" for the current regime. No gas will flow in these pipelines while Putin is in power, and the EU has already prepared alternatives: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-09-27/europe-is-ready-for-a-winter-without-russian-gas-bnef-says https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-09-27/europe-is... Thus these pipelines are worthless to the current regime, except as means to cause damage to the hated Europeans who are enforcing sanctions against them and arming Ukraine against their invasion. You may argue that the relationship might be salvaged with the next regime, but Putin doesn't care. He will be dead or imprisoned for life whenever such next regime takes power.

pphysch 4y ago
The hope in Moscow is that the people of Germany, etc will rise up and democratically remove the Washington proxies (Grünen) from their governments. Then the relationship may be renewed.
- gizajob 4y ago
  Ha. The vodka in Moscow must be pretty strong this year then.
- mopsi 4y ago
  The German Greens have historically been very openly hostile towards the US and NATO. To call them Washington proxies is just plain stupid.
greedo 4y ago
I remember Tiananmen Square. People were horrified at the barbaric reaction of the PRC to peaceful protests. Thirty plus years later, they are one of the world's largest trading partners. Despite their barbaric treatment of the Uighars. So I don't believe that countries won't salvage their "relationship" with Russia given half a chance.

Paradigma11 4y ago

Pretty sure the repair can be done before there is any chance the sanctions would be lifted. So Russia doesnt really lose anything important but is able to sow discord, mistrust and generally raise the fear level about gas supply.

pphysch 4y ago
That's possible, albeit a very expensive prank with no guaranteed upside. Why not just keep the valve shut and pretend you have no interest in opening it?
- Paradigma11 4y ago
  Because Russia needs to do "something" now to hopefully reduce arms and financial support for Ukraine and this is "something".