7 ms·

Russia's greatest leverage was Europe needing their gas, and eventually agreeing to stop supporting Ukraine in order to get the gas turned back on. Now if the

Russia's greatest leverage was Europe needing their gas, and eventually agreeing to stop supporting Ukraine in order to get the gas turned back on. Now if the pipelines are destroyed, no matter how cold and angry citizens in the EU get, EU leadership has no reason to give in to Russian since that now won't get the gas turned back on. If anything, this points to Ukraine or the US doing it.

libertine 4y ago
>Russia's greatest leverage was Europe needing their gas, and eventually agreeing to stop supporting Ukraine in order to get the gas turned back on. That boat has sailed some time ago - you don't need to destroy something that's guaranteed it won't be used for decades probably, if ever again. No country in the West will do any trade with Russia under Putin. There's simply no turning back when you throw diplomacy and international laws out the window, and hide under nuclear threat. In my point of view this was clearly a message that ANY gas that passes through that sea might have the same faith - even in NATO territory. It wasn't by chance that it happened the same day a new gas pipe was opened between Norway and Poland: https://www.euronews.com/2022/09/27/baltic-pipe-norway-poland-gas-pipeline-opens-in-key-move-to-cut-dependency-on-russia https://www.euronews.com/2022/09/27/baltic-pipe-norway-polan... Not to mention that if anyone wants to PUSH GAS PRICES UP, this is a great way to spread panic in the markets "oh no!!! that door wont open again!!!". I only see positives to Russia in this event, not a single positive for anyone else.
- phpthrowaway99 4y ago
  I see huge positives for Ukraine and by proxy the US by removing leverage from Russia.
  - libertine 4y ago
    What leverage?
    - phpthrowaway99 4y ago
      Europe needs gas. Russia has gas. If EU citizens get cold enough and broke enough, they could entice their governments to give in and stop supporting Ukraine and get their gas turned back on. Idk about you, but if it came down to my grandmother freezing at home or a Ukrainian grandmother living in east Ukraine having to say she's now Russian, the Ukraine grandmother is going first.
      - arisAlexis 4y ago
        Not the point. EU cannot buy anything from a country that openly threatens to bomb EU with nukes no matter which grandmother dies where.
        phpthrowaway99 4y ago
        It can. Maybe the word you're looking for is should not.
        LawTalkingGuy 4y ago
        Yes, they could. They'd just declare that people freezing to death in hospitals is worse than the currently theoretical danger of nukes. But the EU cannot buy gas that doesn't have a pipeline. Not only will this keep Germany from lapsing in support but it frees all the resources they'd have wasted in-fighting about the issue.
      - libertine 4y ago
        I'm no expert in geopolitics, or international law - but what country would make any deal with the current Russian government? A government that held the energy sector as an hostage to pressure other countries while they violate international law. Do you see any possibility of everyone sitting at the table, sign new treaties on top of those that were violated, or new contracts that were torn? Because I don't. There's no credibility left on one side - Russian government openly stated that they do what ever they want, and no law applies to them because they have nukes. What government on their right mind would do any deal with them? Besides China, India, and Afghanistan, that are getting great deals out of this, while remaining neutral. >If EU citizens get cold enough and broke enough, they could entice their governments to give in and stop supporting Ukraine and get their gas turned back on. Whatever may come, we've had it much worse in the past, and we made it through. I doubt anyone will freeze to death, like the propaganda is spreading, at worst some people won't be very cozy. >Idk about you, but if it came down to my grandmother freezing at home or a Ukrainian grandmother living in east Ukraine having to say she's now Russian, the Ukraine grandmother is going first. Sometimes it's about doing the right thing, even if it has a cost. You might not want to pay the price, others are, because it's better to stop the warmonger now, than latter at a MUCH higher cost. We should have done it in 2008... or 2014... now we're paying the price for it.
- LawTalkingGuy 4y ago
  It's hugely positive for Ukraine. They'd have done it on day-one if it wouldn't have looked bad. Less income for Russia, less for Russia to divide its allies with. This is a strong negative for Russia. They had control of the pipeline and thus could dangle the offer of gas, now they cannot. Their leverage is gone.
  - libertine 4y ago
    That positive was gained when Russia closed NS1 supply, which was due to end on German terms. After that win, it was set in stone that Germany was done with Russian gas.
    - twelve40 4y ago
      "done"? why would you just make shit up? 42 million cubic meters per day are moving from Russia through Ukraine to Germany right now.
aredox 4y ago
Yes, Ukraine's famous Baltic sea combat divers.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- mytailorisrich 4y ago
  Ukraine has a sea coast and a Navy, so I have no doubt that they have combat divers. Thus the only issue would be a logistic one. My take is that it is trivial to send people to the Baltic along with access to diving equipment and boats. Via sea route it should also be very doable to ship explosives. So it is at least plausible.
  - daniel-cussen 4y ago
    They do 100x harder shit than that every day. Navy SeALs are in 40 countries on any given day, that's just SeALs. Like no risk of death from that, no risk of needing to use SERE training, NOTHING, BUDS, basic underwater demolition, EASIEST SHIT!
  - nradov 4y ago
    Any sort of underwater demolitions is pretty much the opposite of "trivial". How much diving have you done? The real world isn't like a James Bond movie.
    - tomatotomato37 4y ago
      It's still possible enough for a nation that splintered off a previous world superpower. It's not like Soviet combat divers and their expertise just up and disappeared once the union dissolved in the 90s
    - mytailorisrich 4y ago
      I didn't say that underwater demolition was trivial. I said that they surely had military trained in that sort of thing. Actually they even seem to have a 1st Underwater demolitions Unit, so... It's getting those people to the Baltic that seems trivial to me. That does not mean I am accusing them, but that means they are on my list of suspects.
eternalban 4y ago
This is not an act in the same level as the Ukraine-Russia war. This is a very top level geopolitical attack. This appears to be in international waters so it will be interesting when forensic results are published. It can not possibly be in Russia's interest. They could easily nix NS2 at source. And now, even if diplomacy or desperation brings Russia to reach a peace deal with Ukraine, NS2 is out of commission for a long time. Does not compute. US and UK certainly did not want NS2 and Biden did promise to "end it" if Russia invaded Ukraine. And the same day a Polish pipeline opens. But this is exceptionally risky if forensics turns up evidence that points to them. For one, it's an act of war against a fellow NATO member (Germany) and Russia; two, it sets a precedent that an island nation such as UK (with a lot of strategic pipes running in and out of it under Atlantic) can ill afford. So the risk factor seems to argue against that (though motive and who-benefits are clearly there). Germany? It is possible that German deep state is not united. There are Atlantists and those who assert that German and Russian coexistence is optimal. The former faction could have done this to basically close that temptation/option to German government. So that last group is imo the most likely culprit. [Honest question: if CIA acts covertly with say German special services (and not telling the guy in DC, you know, "need to know" and all that /g) and they do this, does that technically mean US committed an act of war or only CIA?] p.s. whoever did this, it is a great advertisement for LNG delivered by ship escorted by blue water navies. This event just showed that gaspipelines are not and can not be strategically reliable energy conduits. They are trivially taken out of commission and repair (even if possible) will require great deal of time and resources to complete.
- Paradigma11 4y ago
  I think it was the Russians trying to sow discord and distrust within the western allies. Nobody was going to use this pipeline in the near future anyway, so there is no immediate cost for Russia. If there really should be a lifting of the sanctions then there would be enough time to repair the pipeline....done and paid by the germans.
  - eternalban 4y ago
    As I mentioned this, or other variants I've seen being posted in twitter, with Russia doing this does not compute. A kilometer wide gas bubble on surface indicates substantial damage. I think it safe to assume that sea water in pipe further damages an additional length of pipeline. German government (or any future one with surprise ala Italy) no longer has the option of giving in to economic and social pressures and making up with Russia before this winter. That option is gone. Russia would be monumentally stupid to lose that option. That was a negotiation card! This is what NS going bye bye means. Someone mentioned elsewhere that this is the response to the referendums that RF just held. This somehow sounds right. Generally don't like to be pessimistic, but this action (whoever did it does not matter, unless some random terror group) indicates that whoever did it has already determined that there will be war. [The real thing not the far away affair on social media] They know this but they are not going to announce it to us until absolutely necessary. There is no way there can be global peace after powers start destroying infrastructure at this level. There will be a contest of strength (we're past the will part) after which pipelines and satellites will once again be safe. p.s. in case it is not clear, I've changed my opinion a bit in this reply. "Risks" may not be relevant because it is understood (and this action was basically a turn in the game with an escalation) that there is going to be, has to be, a showdown. There will be war.
scottLobster 4y ago
Ukraine has active natural gas pipelines running through its territory right now. Why not blow those up? Would be easy enough to claim a stray Russian artillery strike missed and hit a pipeline.
- throw827474737 4y ago
  Exactly, and they need some gas for their winter too, getting their ""tax"" from the pipelines like in good old peaceful times?; :D

libertine 4y ago

>Russia's greatest leverage was Europe needing their gas, and eventually agreeing to stop supporting Ukraine in order to get the gas turned back on. That boat has sailed some time ago - you don't need to destroy something that's guaranteed it won't be used for decades probably, if ever again. No country in the West will do any trade with Russia under Putin. There's simply no turning back when you throw diplomacy and international laws out the window, and hide under nuclear threat. In my point of view this was clearly a message that ANY gas that passes through that sea might have the same faith - even in NATO territory. It wasn't by chance that it happened the same day a new gas pipe was opened between Norway and Poland: https://www.euronews.com/2022/09/27/baltic-pipe-norway-poland-gas-pipeline-opens-in-key-move-to-cut-dependency-on-russia https://www.euronews.com/2022/09/27/baltic-pipe-norway-polan... Not to mention that if anyone wants to PUSH GAS PRICES UP, this is a great way to spread panic in the markets "oh no!!! that door wont open again!!!". I only see positives to Russia in this event, not a single positive for anyone else.

phpthrowaway99 4y ago
I see huge positives for Ukraine and by proxy the US by removing leverage from Russia.
- libertine 4y ago
  What leverage?
  - phpthrowaway99 4y ago
    Europe needs gas. Russia has gas. If EU citizens get cold enough and broke enough, they could entice their governments to give in and stop supporting Ukraine and get their gas turned back on. Idk about you, but if it came down to my grandmother freezing at home or a Ukrainian grandmother living in east Ukraine having to say she's now Russian, the Ukraine grandmother is going first.
    - arisAlexis 4y ago
      Not the point. EU cannot buy anything from a country that openly threatens to bomb EU with nukes no matter which grandmother dies where.
      - phpthrowaway99 4y ago
        It can. Maybe the word you're looking for is should not.
      - LawTalkingGuy 4y ago
        Yes, they could. They'd just declare that people freezing to death in hospitals is worse than the currently theoretical danger of nukes. But the EU cannot buy gas that doesn't have a pipeline. Not only will this keep Germany from lapsing in support but it frees all the resources they'd have wasted in-fighting about the issue.
    - libertine 4y ago
      I'm no expert in geopolitics, or international law - but what country would make any deal with the current Russian government? A government that held the energy sector as an hostage to pressure other countries while they violate international law. Do you see any possibility of everyone sitting at the table, sign new treaties on top of those that were violated, or new contracts that were torn? Because I don't. There's no credibility left on one side - Russian government openly stated that they do what ever they want, and no law applies to them because they have nukes. What government on their right mind would do any deal with them? Besides China, India, and Afghanistan, that are getting great deals out of this, while remaining neutral. >If EU citizens get cold enough and broke enough, they could entice their governments to give in and stop supporting Ukraine and get their gas turned back on. Whatever may come, we've had it much worse in the past, and we made it through. I doubt anyone will freeze to death, like the propaganda is spreading, at worst some people won't be very cozy. >Idk about you, but if it came down to my grandmother freezing at home or a Ukrainian grandmother living in east Ukraine having to say she's now Russian, the Ukraine grandmother is going first. Sometimes it's about doing the right thing, even if it has a cost. You might not want to pay the price, others are, because it's better to stop the warmonger now, than latter at a MUCH higher cost. We should have done it in 2008... or 2014... now we're paying the price for it.
LawTalkingGuy 4y ago
It's hugely positive for Ukraine. They'd have done it on day-one if it wouldn't have looked bad. Less income for Russia, less for Russia to divide its allies with. This is a strong negative for Russia. They had control of the pipeline and thus could dangle the offer of gas, now they cannot. Their leverage is gone.
- libertine 4y ago
  That positive was gained when Russia closed NS1 supply, which was due to end on German terms. After that win, it was set in stone that Germany was done with Russian gas.
  - twelve40 4y ago
    "done"? why would you just make shit up? 42 million cubic meters per day are moving from Russia through Ukraine to Germany right now.

aredox 4y ago

Yes, Ukraine's famous Baltic sea combat divers.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
mytailorisrich 4y ago
Ukraine has a sea coast and a Navy, so I have no doubt that they have combat divers. Thus the only issue would be a logistic one. My take is that it is trivial to send people to the Baltic along with access to diving equipment and boats. Via sea route it should also be very doable to ship explosives. So it is at least plausible.
- daniel-cussen 4y ago
  They do 100x harder shit than that every day. Navy SeALs are in 40 countries on any given day, that's just SeALs. Like no risk of death from that, no risk of needing to use SERE training, NOTHING, BUDS, basic underwater demolition, EASIEST SHIT!
- nradov 4y ago
  Any sort of underwater demolitions is pretty much the opposite of "trivial". How much diving have you done? The real world isn't like a James Bond movie.
  - tomatotomato37 4y ago
    It's still possible enough for a nation that splintered off a previous world superpower. It's not like Soviet combat divers and their expertise just up and disappeared once the union dissolved in the 90s
  - mytailorisrich 4y ago
    I didn't say that underwater demolition was trivial. I said that they surely had military trained in that sort of thing. Actually they even seem to have a 1st Underwater demolitions Unit, so... It's getting those people to the Baltic that seems trivial to me. That does not mean I am accusing them, but that means they are on my list of suspects.

eternalban 4y ago

This is not an act in the same level as the Ukraine-Russia war. This is a very top level geopolitical attack. This appears to be in international waters so it will be interesting when forensic results are published. It can not possibly be in Russia's interest. They could easily nix NS2 at source. And now, even if diplomacy or desperation brings Russia to reach a peace deal with Ukraine, NS2 is out of commission for a long time. Does not compute. US and UK certainly did not want NS2 and Biden did promise to "end it" if Russia invaded Ukraine. And the same day a Polish pipeline opens. But this is exceptionally risky if forensics turns up evidence that points to them. For one, it's an act of war against a fellow NATO member (Germany) and Russia; two, it sets a precedent that an island nation such as UK (with a lot of strategic pipes running in and out of it under Atlantic) can ill afford. So the risk factor seems to argue against that (though motive and who-benefits are clearly there). Germany? It is possible that German deep state is not united. There are Atlantists and those who assert that German and Russian coexistence is optimal. The former faction could have done this to basically close that temptation/option to German government. So that last group is imo the most likely culprit. [Honest question: if CIA acts covertly with say German special services (and not telling the guy in DC, you know, "need to know" and all that /g) and they do this, does that technically mean US committed an act of war or only CIA?] p.s. whoever did this, it is a great advertisement for LNG delivered by ship escorted by blue water navies. This event just showed that gaspipelines are not and can not be strategically reliable energy conduits. They are trivially taken out of commission and repair (even if possible) will require great deal of time and resources to complete.

Paradigma11 4y ago
I think it was the Russians trying to sow discord and distrust within the western allies. Nobody was going to use this pipeline in the near future anyway, so there is no immediate cost for Russia. If there really should be a lifting of the sanctions then there would be enough time to repair the pipeline....done and paid by the germans.
- eternalban 4y ago
  As I mentioned this, or other variants I've seen being posted in twitter, with Russia doing this does not compute. A kilometer wide gas bubble on surface indicates substantial damage. I think it safe to assume that sea water in pipe further damages an additional length of pipeline. German government (or any future one with surprise ala Italy) no longer has the option of giving in to economic and social pressures and making up with Russia before this winter. That option is gone. Russia would be monumentally stupid to lose that option. That was a negotiation card! This is what NS going bye bye means. Someone mentioned elsewhere that this is the response to the referendums that RF just held. This somehow sounds right. Generally don't like to be pessimistic, but this action (whoever did it does not matter, unless some random terror group) indicates that whoever did it has already determined that there will be war. [The real thing not the far away affair on social media] They know this but they are not going to announce it to us until absolutely necessary. There is no way there can be global peace after powers start destroying infrastructure at this level. There will be a contest of strength (we're past the will part) after which pipelines and satellites will once again be safe. p.s. in case it is not clear, I've changed my opinion a bit in this reply. "Risks" may not be relevant because it is understood (and this action was basically a turn in the game with an escalation) that there is going to be, has to be, a showdown. There will be war.

scottLobster 4y ago

Ukraine has active natural gas pipelines running through its territory right now. Why not blow those up? Would be easy enough to claim a stray Russian artillery strike missed and hit a pipeline.

throw827474737 4y ago
Exactly, and they need some gas for their winter too, getting their ""tax"" from the pipelines like in good old peaceful times?; :D