The discourse regarding this incident is deranged. Despite all the resources put into teaching intellectuals and academians to exercise critical thinking, they still believe the most absurd claims without any evidence.
The claims I've seen circulating are all insane, such as that Russia did it to avoid being found guilty of contract violations or that they did it to attack the Norway-Baltic pipeline. Note that the Nord Stream pipelines' total capacity is 150+ BCM, whereas the Norway-Baltic pipeline is only 10BCM NG - less than 1/10th.
Russia has gained zero, whereas EU countries have removed an internal pressure point, and the USA has gained a larger energy share. I don't know who sabotaged the pipelines, but the superficial blaming of Russia without any evidence should be criticized.
Lastly, I detest all attacks and invasions of sovereign entities.
Cui bono? The argument about "who benefits" is going to go on for quite a while, but I'll agree with you that this doesn't seem to benefit Russia at all. If all actors involved were perfectly rational, Russia would be near the bottom of my list for suspect.
Of course, all actors are not perfectly rational, and Russia is notably irrational at the moment, so I guess they can't be eliminated from the list entirely. Still, I don't consider them the most likely.
Vlad is very far from rational these days. Gazprom was sending out pictures of their 'oil leaks' earlier this month [0] in a very obviously mocking way. That Vlad would intentionally sabotage the pipes to thumb his nose at the Germans is more than likely to me. Nothing about this war has made any sense for Vlad.
The only thing that does make sense to me is if Vlad is trying to use the destruction of the pipe as a way to get sanctions lifted. The pipe and compressor stations that may have been destroyed are quite difficult to replace without the help of Russia. So Vlad may be trying to use his second-to-last card [1] to get the Germans on his side again.
To you and I, that's obviously not going to make the Germans be on his side. But Vlad isn't really playing with a full deck anymore (sorry for all the card related metaphors). Blowing up the pipes is a 'cunningly dumb' idea that kinda fits with end-stage regimes like his.
The US is already exporting everything it possibly can as fast as Europe can accept it. The US ain't no saint, but the energy angle isn't a plausible motive.
...think about this for a second. There's supply, and then there's demand.
I live in Appletown, where there are two orchards and three cider-making operations. I run one of the orchards and make X apples per year, it's a fixe amount. My competitor makes ~X apples per year.
Now a giant bomb is dropped on my competitor's orchard. I can still only sell X apples per year, as that's all I can currently make. However, do you think the price of my apples will go up or down?
In this scenario, shipments from your competitor's orchard have already been halted for a month. The market has already priced in the loss, and burning down the orchard itself doesn't change anything. Nord Stream hasn't transmitted any gas since August, since Putin has been gamely claiming that it needs new pumps which, coincidentally, can only be achieved via the lifting of sanctions.
It certainly highlights the vulnerability of undersea pipelines to sabotage. If Russia had written off a restart of NS(1/2) this move further destabilizes the large EU economies, introduces fear and uncertainty into the political theater and sows discord between allies.
Any of the highly sophisticated players could have rendered the pipeline useless without this explicit show of force. A simple reversing of the cathodic protection undersea would permanently degrade kilometers of pipeline. There are dozens of proposed scenarios that would permanently damage both pipelines while maintaining at least the semblance of reasonable doubt.
So the "critical thinking exercise" is not just who gains from the NS destruction, but who gains from this flashy, public show of force.
At this point the "China Theory" that this forces Russia over the barrel on pricing is as good as any.
(Disclaimer - I think Russia totally did it, but no one here knows).
Russia was searching any possible excuse to not deliver gas well before this incident, and had stopped delivering already (from a failed turbine and missing spares from Siemens to complicated payment methods). There were public threads to not deliver gas during the winter also: cfr. "it will be a long winter" video.
Negating those informations, and the fact that rationality is no the first thing that comes to my mind, when I think of Putin's actions, cannot be seriously called "exercise critical thinking".
Of course it should be carefully analysed, but asserting "it was USA" is a long shot.
Russia lost a bargaining chip though with this. Before they could hold it ransom. With the pipe being destroyed - they can’t use it as a bargaining chip. It’s just gone.
It doesn’t make sense for Russia to destroy its own pipelines when it controls the valves…
This is like me having a farm where I have all my food - I decide to not sell as to create an incentive for people to do what I want. Am I going to burn down my farm and lose that as a bargaining chip? Why would I do that? That doesn’t benefit me at all…
The claims I've seen circulating are all insane, such as that Russia did it to avoid being found guilty of contract violations or that they did it to attack the Norway-Baltic pipeline. Note that the Nord Stream pipelines' total capacity is 150+ BCM, whereas the Norway-Baltic pipeline is only 10BCM NG - less than 1/10th.
Russia has gained zero, whereas EU countries have removed an internal pressure point, and the USA has gained a larger energy share. I don't know who sabotaged the pipelines, but the superficial blaming of Russia without any evidence should be criticized.
Lastly, I detest all attacks and invasions of sovereign entities.