[Goose]

I still don’t understanding the nordstream explosions.  Like, what does Russia stand to gain from it?  A warning shot that the Norwegian pipeline to Poland is also vulnerable? An excuse to cut off Russian gas without shutting it down for “maintenence”?  An “f/u” to Europe even though in the long run it will accelerate Europe’s move to independence from Russian gas?

One analysis (DW?) I saw said that if Europe wants it repaired, it will have to be the Russians that do it (it is their pipeline).  Further, to make repairs, some sanctions would have to be lifted.

I still don't understand it.  Two functional, but idle, Nordstream pipelines (actually each is a pair) would have been a carrot temptingly just beyond the easy reach of the EU. An opposing party could yell "Enough" and bargain away sanctions to get Russian gas.  Broken pipelines means the EU has no choice but to find other ways to get energy through the winter.

To be honest, I'm not ready to assume it was done by Putin.   Anti-West hawks in Russia?  Anti-Russian hawks in the West?   Global warming extremists?   If it really takes a nation-state to do this (rather than some group with a submersible), then I can't imagine any would risk it except Russia.

EU will be suffering a different kind of Cold War this winter.

I am a bit surprised nobody has stated the obvious. The country that "benefits" the most from this pipeline destruction is Ukraine. If things get bad this winter, Europe could be tempted to throw in the towel, buy Russian gas, and dump Ukraine. With no pipelines, they can't do that even if they wanted to. That doesn't mean I think Ukraine did it, but normally that is where one would start to look.

One does need to consider this could also be a commercially motivated action. States (and companies) involved in the LNG business might look at this as a way to ensure their customers have to buy LNG. Having a potential alternative creates uncertainty, and we know how business hates uncertainty :-). Some LNG exporter state may have figured it would be possible to do this and everybody would blame Russia, not them.

It does not take a nation-state to do this. There are many underwater construction companies and oil field support companies with the equipment and expertise to to this kind of thing. The challenges would be to do so covertly and to maintain security subsequently. The covert requirement could be met several ways. The security issues could be the only way we find out who actually did it.

[Goose]

I still don’t understanding the nordstream explosions.  Like, what does Russia stand to gain from it?  A warning shot that the Norwegian pipeline to Poland is also vulnerable? An excuse to cut off Russian gas without shutting it down for “maintenence”?  An “f/u” to Europe even though in the long run it will accelerate Europe’s move to independence from Russian gas?

One analysis (DW?) I saw said that if Europe wants it repaired, it will have to be the Russians that do it (it is their pipeline).  Further, to make repairs, some sanctions would have to be lifted.

I still don't understand it.  Two functional, but idle, Nordstream pipelines (actually each is a pair) would have been a carrot temptingly just beyond the easy reach of the EU. An opposing party could yell "Enough" and bargain away sanctions to get Russian gas.  Broken pipelines means the EU has no choice but to find other ways to get energy through the winter.

To be honest, I'm not ready to assume it was done by Putin.   Anti-West hawks in Russia?  Anti-Russian hawks in the West?   Global warming extremists?   If it really takes a nation-state to do this (rather than some group with a submersible), then I can't imagine any would risk it except Russia.

EU will be suffering a different kind of Cold War this winter.

I am a bit surprised nobody has stated the obvious. The country that "benefits" the most from this pipeline destruction is Ukraine. If things get bad this winter, Europe could be tempted to throw in the towel, buy Russian gas, and dump Ukraine. With no pipelines, they can't do that even if they wanted to. That doesn't mean I think Ukraine did it, but normally that is where one would start to look.

One does need to consider this could also be a commercially motivated action. States (and companies) involved in the LNG business might look at this as a way to ensure their customers have to buy LNG. Having a potential alternative creates uncertainty, and we know how business hates uncertainty :-). Some LNG exporter state may have figured it would be possible to do this and everybody would blame Russia, not them.

It does not take a nation-state to do this. There are many underwater construction companies and oil field support companies with the equipment and expertise to to this kind of thing. The challenges would be to do so covertly and to maintain security subsequently. The covert requirement could be met several ways. The security issues could be the only way we find out who actually did it.