DATA:
THE NORDSTREAM AFFAIR IN DATA POINTS:
The road to Nordstream crisis had very deep and old roots. Let me briefly sketch some. There exists lots of data for interested readers to examine many old pre 2022 historical documents and statements. Let´s just look at a few remarkable which gradually shaped narrative toward the affair:
On 17 July 2018 - Boris Johnson wrote that he feels that Nord Stream 2 is divisive and could leave the EU’s supply reliant on “a malign Russian state”. He acknowledged that British interests are at stake and admitted that that "My primary concern is not the potential commercial losses for those private companies, or even the success—or lack of success—of former German Chancellors in their deal making, but the strategic interests of the United Kingdom and our friends and allies." He recognized the price for Gazprom, several years of their investment, their future income depends on it. “Nord Stream-2 and Turkish Stream are all deeply value-destructive projects that will eat up almost half of Gazprom’s investments over the next five years.” (003)
Already in 2020 the UK while still in EU was pressuring Germany to decouple from Russian energy. On 3 October 2020 a news was published with message that stated "Germany pressed to rethink Nord Stream 2 pipeline after Navalny poisoning". The Novichok case is still not solved, it is unknown if it was real or not but one issue is clear, it was used as a leverage against Germany.
Shortly after that Boris Johnson's on 14 Dec 2020 reveals New energy security strategy which aims to reduce the UK's dependence on imported fossil fuels and transition to cleaner, more sustainable energy sources.
There were many debated in the UK Parliament and elsewhere about the Nordstream in relation to UK´s own energy insecurity and loss of competitiveness vis-a-vis Germany and the rest of EU. One fine example is a debate from 2021. Volume 690: debated on Wednesday 10 March 2021 (079). The 2021 integrated review (into foreign, security and defence policy) identified Russia as the “greatest threat”– while naming China as “a systemic challenge”. (003) As for USA their main threat is a peer competitor China and economically the EU.
In 2021 Boris Johnson realizing the gravity and criticality of the situation with UK energy security, balance of payments, trade which was hit hard after Brexit, and updated energy security strategy which aimed to reduce the UK's dependence on imported fossil fuels, he also previously proclaimed he wants to make from the UK a 'Saudi Arabia of wind power'. A vision which can not happen if this form of alternative energy does not have demand, customers who prefer long term piped gas deals.
The UK energy insecurity issue is that neither solar nor wind are competitive to Russian piped gas while Britain´s own oil and gas fields in North sea are being depleted with no new discoveries to replace them. Energy trading through electricity interconnectors between the EU and Great Britain was after Brexit no longer managed through existing single market tools, such as "EU market coupling" which complicated building of new wind fields. So in other words, the end of energy market coupling has had significant implications for the UK's energy market, the excess energy when wind delivers strong would not be automatically sold to EU markets which is a bottleneck for Johnson´s vision. (002) and (041).
The July 2021 article in Guardian cited that "Britain plans to launch covert special forces operations against Russia and China" The RT reported that Royal Marines Brigadier Mark Totten revealed to the Times the UK Special Forces are about to concentrate on some new covert counter-state tasks with a focus on Russia and China. Totten said: "The British Royal Marines are to take over some of the “traditional” roles of the nation’s special forces units – the Special Air Service (SAS) and Special Boat Service (SBS) – as they are preparing for some new “higher risk” counter-state tasks."
Guardian reported that the most secretive parts of the British military are likely to get a new focus and a new remit that would involve countering Russia and other state actors through secret missions. Totten’s comments were a rare instance of a British military official openly admitting that London plans to deploy the UK Special Forces on covert missions specifically targeting Russia and China. (081)
UK Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy Kwasi Kwarteng told a parliamentary committee Sept. 22. 2021 that "We are not exposed to Russian supply as many of our EU counterparts are" (027). It was clear that any disruption of Russian export would not affect the UK´s energy security.
On 16 Nov 2021 - Boris Johnson warned EU to choose between Ukraine and Nord Stream 2. Writing in The Sunday Telegraph, Truss urged “friends across Europe” to stand together in opposing the Nord Stream 2 pipeline. Same message was delivered in an interview for another newspapers 16 Nov 2021 "EU ultimatum! Boris warns bloc must chose Russian gas pipeline or 'stick up for Ukraine'" (042)
On Nov, 18 2021 - Nord Stream 2: Will you go to the Gazprom with me? British Prime Minister Boris Johnson said on Monday that “a choice is shortly coming” for Europe. Later on 30 Nov 2021 - Liz Truss urged Nato allies to block Russia’s Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline, stating that "It remains to be seen how far the UK can push its opposition to Nord Stream 2". (002)
The first decision to take both pipelines down had to be done after strategists realized (003) that Russian energy flows to EU is a serious threat to UK´s own energy security and that the removal of the threat is necessary; (003). Slowly, the focus of UK went from opposition against Nord Stream 2 to opposition against all Russian hydrocarbon exports. All legal means to block Nord Stream from within EU ended after Brexit, the UK had no leverage against Germany like US having its army protecting its ally. The only means left was a physical removal of the threat.
On February, 27 2022 - British foreign minister Liz Truss said she would press for further measures against Russia, particularly in cutting off their oil and gas supplies, at a meeting with her counterparts in the G7 group of rich nations. "The real objective is to degrade the Russian economy because what we know is Putin’s war machine is funded by revenues from oil and gas." (163)
In March, 2 2022 - UK gov study "Geopolitical implications of Nord Stream 2" (163) and TONY BLAIR INSTITUTE FOR GLOBAL CHANGE released paper "Cutting the Cord: Ending Europe’s Energy Dependency on Russia". Concluding is a statement that such a plan requires urgent coordination between the EU and its partners to lay out both short-term measures and a longer strategic vision for greater energy security.
Sanctions were imposed against Nordstream 2, but the first Nord Stream company. It was never subject to any sanctions as it was delivering Russian gas to Europe through Germany based on long term agreements under fixed price. The UK seen that as an obstacle to own energy security ut there were also other motives raging from geo-political to personal.
In 17 March 2022 - Boris Johnson stated that: "We need to wean the West off Russian oil and gas to punish Putin’s war machine"
There were many studies of the issue. The Institute for Government (IfG) said the security of the UK’s physical supply will “likely hold up” following possible Russian gas export disruptions to the EU, even without measures from the strategy, due to diversity of supply.
During this time active measures were taken to mitigate future impact of the mission. Initially perceived as a threat to energy security, the UK's opposition to Nord Stream 2 ultimately bolstered its efforts to become a net energy exporter. (027).
17 May 2022 - EU energy security: Implications for the UK stated that: "Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has stimulated UK and EU cooperation on the security of energy supply." and that "there is insufficient LNG import capacity within the EU, but spare capacity in the UK as well as capacity on the pipelines from the UK to mainland Europe". (041)
What followed was several months of diplomatic bashing (002) by Johnson and Truss stressing dangers of reliance on Russian energy exports. On April,6 2022 - Truss statement was that We're going further to cripple Putin’s war machine (163).
Truss was stating that "We need to ... degrade the Russian economy" (163). After Boris Johnson said that" we can’t close down use of Russian oil and gas overnight" Johnson made several trips and was in talk to Middle East exporters to ramp up their exports to the whole Europe in case of Russian ones are lower (002). The statement "We have got to make sure we have substitute supply." had to be made on behalf of allies as the UK had minimal exposure. The UK government also warned its companies to divest in advance from Russian markets. (040). On 13 March 2022 - British finance minister Rishi Sunak called on more British companies on Sunday to wind down their existing investments in Russia. It looks like the UK, US based oil/gas majors companies started the exit from Russia. The UK was very active in pursuing its companies to leave RU market and said insurers not to cooperate with Nord Stream projects.
In March 2022 a new UK energy strategy was approved. It included building international support to reduce Russian energy revenues, providing a key EU entry point for non-Russian supplies of gas. "We are examining our infrastructure to ensure gas flows efficiently between the UK, Europe and the global market through our interconnectors and LNG terminals and promote gas infrastructure to be hydrogen-ready" which was later part of the failed idealism by Leyen "RePowerEU". In a video here Prime Minister Boris Johnson said why it’s vital that we invest in renewable energy and end the West’s reliance on Putin’s oil and gas. That is also a position the EU accepts later when covering up for the UK.
In April 2022 Liz Truss was ready to try and "beat global aggressors at their own game" so she set out her plan to reconfigure the UK’s foreign policy suggesting EU could go further still – with a ban on imports of oil and gas; hydrocarbons make up a third of the Russian economy.
Data point that plans were developed in incremental steps and the UK positioned itself to gain from the event along the development of Ukrainian-Russian conflict. The Istanbul peace talks were shredded after Boris Johnson personally interfered, the criticality increased in lock-steps with other world events.
On April, 15 2022 - The Joint Expeditionary Force (JEF) - Admiral Sir Antony David Radakin, KCB, ADC, Chief of the Defence Staff stated that "JEF recognises that the character of warfare has evolved, and the distinction between peace and war is not as clear as it once was. The grey area this creates has allowed our adversaries to develop new ways of threatening us, and we recognise the need to counter this by protecting, engaging and constraining the threat." Note that JEF is not bound by the article V. Also "We therefore see advantage in the JEF being able to take collective action below the traditional threshold of conflict, if necessary, before NATO declares Article V, in a complementary capacity to NATO." (043)Event in the summer 2022 hinted to an improved relations, rapprochement between Russia and Germany seemed possible. Joseph Borrell, the EU’s chief diplomat, on acknowledged that certain political factions in the bloc wanted the EU to drop its support for Ukraine, push Kyiv into a ceasefire and abandon sanctions against Russia to ease economic pressure on European countries.
Britain's Boris Johnson Warns Against Attempts To 'Renormalize' Relations With Russia. Russia was making pro-active steps, as a part of negotiations it withdrew its forces from the area around Kiev but then the Butcha incident happened. The UK was again the most vocal against any reproachment with Russia.
In may Russian sanctions prohibit Gazprom from using Yamal-Europe for gas transit via Poland. Options to import Russian gas were slowly narrowing.
In June 8 June 2022 Angela Merkel in the interview about the deal with USA about not granting Nord Stream 2 AG the needed certification as a soft-power for not entering Ukraine: "But it wasn't an easy decision... "The thesis at the time was that once Nord Stream 2 is operational, Putin will stop supplying gas through Ukraine or even attack it."... The West ensured that gas was routed through Ukraine anyway, and she continued to receive transit fees. Merkel pointed out that Russia then attacked Ukraine on February 24, when gas was not yet routed through Nord Stream 2 . "In this sense, gas was not a weapon," Merkel said." This statement further confirms that the Biden - Scholz (as a new German Chancellor who did not need to honour Merkel´s agreement) re-signing the this so called "Merkel´s deal" in February was supposed to act as a "leverage against Russia" to deter them from entering Ukraine not for destroying physically both Nordstream 1 and 2 twin pipelines.
The commitment was of a temporary nation because would the investment be completely stopped due to political pressure Gazprom could demand at the arbitration court the full compensation for investment going bad, potential ISDS claims under the Energy Charter Treaty. The words of German environment minister Svenja Schulze from last February give a clue. “We also run the risk of ending up in international arbitration courts with compensation claims if we stop the project”.
In July 2022 First UK-Germany power link gets financial green light. A financial agreement was reached on Thursday to build the first power cable linking Britain and Germany.Further developments were shadowing legal progress on two important cases the Unbundling of gas exporter and pipeline operator and the Swiss court delayed the bankruptcy but only for half a year. Attempts To 'Renormalize' Relations With Russia were curbed but not forever. The time was ticking and weather conditions make dives in winter more risky. There was not much time left.
These two pro-Gazprom court decisions accelerated the urgency of knocking both Nordstream twin pipelines as it was more and more obvious that at some point they will be relaunched. More than that the problem with returning Turbines, issue in which the delay in commissioning was caused partly by Canada and partly by the UK´s Siemens office not delivering INCOTERMS documents (171).
The complex operation was carefully prepared in advance, with a final decision had to be made by Liz Truss after she assumed the role of Prime Minister. The long term planning was confirmed on 28th of September by Jens Stoltenberg. He was also stressing the day before that this other issue is outside from Ukrainian conflict and that this "escalation beyond Ukraine... we need to ensure that this doesn’t evolve into a full-fledged war in Europe". Jens Stoltenberg was incremental in the cover-up, one of the reasons was to keep NATO together: "...is the importance of the transatlantic bond, North America and Europe standing together, and American leadership". Preparations could be traced to many events described in these following posts: here, here, here and here.
The post points that the window of opportunity to lay explosives was after the Yearly maintenance 10 day long check-up in July as the internal/external examination would have revealed charges. The plan included the post explosion management through AFF event in NY and through meetings at UN and in Norfolk. The NATO Baltops exercise has been conducted in June, before the maintenance which disqualifies it. Hersh´s claim is invalid also because NATO as an organization has not been considered a suspect. This is confirmed bz the SWE main investigator´s statement that just one state is the main suspect and it was not Russia, not USA and not pro-Ukrainian group.
In June the plan leaked, was intercepted or a UK submarine/minisub/un-manned drone could have been found near pipelines. True reason is unknown but some data exist. It is known that the USA (CIA) gave to allies strategic warning.
Several suitable news were identified which supports this sequences and cross-reference. Either it originates through work of CIA itself or suspected action was identified by intelligence services. If the possible claim that a pre-plan feasibility approach has been conducted near Bornholm during the Baltops then the CIA warning due to timing and US-UK, NATO-UK and GER-UK meetings on Navy level could make sense. The navy data would have been assessed, studied and conclusions drawn.
Note that EU also studied vulnerabilities of its infrastructure and organized on Bornholm a seminar discussing undersea vulnerabilities. It was requested by EU, The Subcommittee on Security and Defence (SEDE) which is a subcommittee of the Committee on Foreign Affairs. It is responsible for the European security and defence policy (ESDP). It cooperated with Norwegian Institute for International Affairs, Oslo, Norway. The study identified undersea explosives, military grade drones, submersibles and un/manned submarines as a means of attack and notices that preventing such attack is difficult and requires coordination. IT specifically warned against malicious activities under the threshold of Armed conflict. The lead author Christian Bueger - Professor of International Relations specialised in maritime security and ocean governance at University of Copenhagen - later after the attack stated that: "A first option is that the attacks could have been carried out as an underwater operation using advanced submarine technology... This implies that we are looking at a state and its navy. Although the attacks took place outside the territorial waters of the Nato members Denmark and Sweden, they could be interpreted as an act of war."
Was this some kind of soft politics warning? Was this some soft diplomatic politics message?
During June Russia obviously also noticed some suspicious actions and sent there a warship and plane to check it out. It made intrusion into Danish Territorial zone which Danes protested against.
The analysis of legal implications concerning attacks on pipelines shows that only Nordstream sections in Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZs) of third countries could be attacked as they provide less legal protection versus those is exporter´s Territorial zone or Importer´s Territorial zone (TZs) (032, 154, 164 165, 209, 210). Interestingly it was the UK´s government which was studying the case already in 2017, a Rishi Sunak´s paper which made it to NATO cycles (051). Other Russian pipelines are traversing directly through states which are paid transport fees. The only section where legal uncertainty in care of non-accidental damages exists is the area in Baltic sea, jurisdiction in EEZ is unclear as has been proven after Sweden and Denmark closed their preliminary investigations.
In August German politicians demanded reopening Nordstream pipelines to ease German economic troubles.
Legally Nordstream could be reopened. Turbines issue stalled Nord Stream 1 but the Nord Stream 2 had a good chance to get the postponed certification so the energy would flow again.
The time was running short before winter would come for divers to knock it out.
Because the truth matters.
Please consider supporting my work with a donation.
Every bit helps keep this mission alive!
