It's been an unsolved mystery that continues to be debated: what party was behind the Russian/German gas pipeline disaster Sept. 26 in the Baltic Sea earlier this year, which area experts attribute to sabotage of 3 of the 4 pipelines. Which party had the incentive and the ability? Fingers have been pointed at both US and Russia as having the capabilities, motive, and opportunity. The Russians has a military presence in the Baltic Sea region. The Western alliance has been conflicted over Russian/German economic ties, and the Nord pipelines provide an alternative to transit fee supply routes through Ukraine and Poland.
So Russia could see a false flag operation as useful in a divide-and-conquer strategy: If the US, whose own liquified natural gas interests have a competitive interest as a European supplier, could be implicated, it would roil the NATO alliance. Not to mention nearly half of Russia's national budget comes from energy revenues; as the second leading global producer, it benefits from a tight or uncertain global market. Also, note that Nord 2 hadn't been approved by Germany before Russia's invasion of Ukraine, and Nord 1 had been shut for reported maintenance, which many saw as Russian pressure on Europe.
As others have pointed out, pipeline-supplied Russian natural gas is almost 25% cheaper to alternatives, but Russian market share of EU natural gas imports has dropped from about 90% to 37% over the past 3 decades as Europe has diversified its suppliers and built out LNG infrastructure.
What about motives for the US? Well, Germany had already frozen Nord 2 approval after Russia recognized 2 Ukraine secessionist regions just before the Russian invasion. And Western sanctions had hardened sanctions on Russia, including energy imports, in the interim. Why would the US take out the Nord 2 pipeline when it was not approved and would likely not be revisited until the Ukraine intervention has been resolved? On the other hand, Russia has repeatedly cut off exports to other nation/customers for policy reasons. Recall that Putin has floated the idea of use of tactical nuclear weapons in the Ukraine theater. The ruptured pipelines can be repaired. It may well be a message that Putin wants to send that European energy infrastructure remains vulnerable, and there are other (non-Russian) pipelines.
Most of the case against the US is a dubious vow by Biden on not allowing Nord 2 to go forward. But the US position against Nord 2 preceded Biden, and the focus was on diplomatic channels.
I do not claim to resolve the kerfuffle here; I do think, like most analysts, that Russia is most likely culpable but remain open to where the evidence leads us.
So why this rant now? A recent report suggests there's been no signature evidence yet of Russian involvement in the sabotage.
Snowden decided to comment on the situation, implying it was a US operation but allied countries are burying the story to protect the US and NATO.
I am one of the few libertarians out there who has refused to support a pardon or clemency for Snowden, the reason being he violated his contract for access to classified data. I argue that libertarians honor contracts. I've probably published a half dozen tweets to that effect. I don't see much reaction, one way or another, to my point of view. Maybe there has been, and I'm not aware of it.
So in the middle of all this, Putin has granted Snowden Russian citizenship.
I snapped back to his above-cited tweet by asking a rhetorical question: is attacking the US one of the prices you pay for a war criminal granting you citizenship?
