[Skybird]

Originally Posted by mapuc

Translation do not work.

Aaaaaaah.....
-----------------------------

Who is behind the Nord Stream 2 blow-up? The trail leads increasingly clearly to Ukraine, but German experts and politicians remain skeptical

The Ukrainian army is said to have planned the attack on the pipeline - American and German intelligence services were informed months beforehand. Did the German government fail to protect critical infrastructure?

"Ukraine is the prime suspect." That was the assumption of a former senior official of Germany's foreign intelligence agency, the BND, on May 25. In a background interview with journalists, he addressed the attacks on the Nord Stream 1 and 2 gas pipelines last September. The former intelligence man cited his contacts in the security agencies, which he said were now investigating almost exclusively in that direction some nine months after the blast.

Russia's motives are weak, he said, and it would make more sense for Ukraine to blow up the pipeline: Moscow's main source of foreign currency would thus be drained, and the EU's most powerful member, Germany, would be forever disengaged from its fatal energy partnership with Russia.

An article published on Tuesday evening European time by the "Washington Post" supports this assessment: With reference to the so-called Pentagon Leaks, the American newspaper reported that an unnamed European intelligence service is said to have learned from a source in the Ukrainian general staff three months before the explosions about a Ukrainian plan to blow up the Nord Stream 1 pipeline in June 2022. The CIA was then informed, he said, and in turn shared the knowledge with the German government.
However, intelligence and maritime security experts warn against jumping to conclusions. It remains completely unclear whether Ukraine was behind the attacks. German foreign policy experts from government and opposition parties echo these doubts - and warn against possible Russian disinformation.
Gerhard Conrad, a former senior BND official, believes that the research by the Washington Post has a high degree of credibility. "The fact that there was a detailed report on a Ukrainian plan to carry out an attack on Nord Stream 1 in June is, in my view, now sufficiently proven," Conrad tells the NZZ. "This is additional evidence, but nothing more. In the end, as we know, the plan was not carried out in June."

Conrad adds that there are still strong indications that Russia was involved in the act. For example, he says, a Russian ship with special equipment for underwater operations had been in the vicinity of the explosion site just a few days earlier for no apparent reason and with its transponder turned off. Also, from Ukraine's point of view, it would make little sense to completely destroy Nord Stream 1 but leave one leg of the Nord Stream 2 pipeline intact.
This is also pointed out by frigate captain Göran Swistek, who today works as an expert on maritime security for the German Institute for International and Security Affairs. He still considers the Russian state a likely perpetrator. At the beginning of investigations after terrorist attacks, he says, the question always arises as to who has the capabilities and motivation for such an operation.

When it comes to capabilities, everything points first to Russia: "For example, Russia has invested massively in the development of underwater drones in recent years and has shown a strong interest in mapping the North and Baltic Seas," Swistek says in the interview. "In addition, blasting required specific expertise in pipelines, which was most readily available in Russia."
When asked about motivation, Swistek also believes Russian involvement is more likely: "Russia had a specific interest. Chaos in the energy markets before winter and uncertainty in European societies." For Ukraine, on the other hand, there was a clear disproportion between effort and return.

In an interview with the NZZ, the foreign policy spokesman of the FDP parliamentary group in the German Bundestag, Ulrich Lechte, also questions the benefits: "Why should Ukraine have attacked the pipeline at a time when the Germans were already supplying Kiev with weapons, no more gas was running through Nord Stream 1 and politicians were already announcing that they would look for alternatives to Russian gas?"

Lechte does not want to rule out anything in principle in the case. But the foreign policy expert considers the variant that Ukraine is supposed to have initiated the detonation "completely absurd." Especially since this took place at a time when the whole of Europe was supporting the country.

"We must not forget that Russian intelligence services in particular are currently pursuing advanced Cold War forms of work - with disinformation and false-flag operations," warns former BND employee Gerhard Conrad.
"It is even conceivable, and thus first to be clarified, that the alleged Ukrainian plan was Russian disinformation fed as game material to the European intelligence service cited by the 'Washington Post' in order to steer the trail of its own later attack on Ukraine," Conrad explains. "The script for the attack would then have been written in Moscow itself right away and implemented with modifications at the operationally appropriate time."

CDU member of the Bundestag Roderich Kiesewetter also points this out: "The Russian war of aggression against Ukraine is also an information war," says the opposition politician. "It may be that false leads were deliberately laid. That's why I advise caution."
So whether Ukraine carried out the attack or not remains doubtful. But one thing is almost certainly clear: the German government was aware of a plan to blow up the pipelines three months before the attack. Why didn't it act?
"After the intelligence reports became known, the government could have shown a stronger presence with warships, but also with ships of the Federal Police," says former frigate captain Swistek. "In addition, the German government could have exerted political influence on Ukraine."

Gerhard Conrad agrees. The former employee of Germany's foreign intelligence service suspects that, after dutifully informing the Parliamentary Control Committee, the German government probably hoped for the best and trusted that Ukrainian plans would remain "on hold," as the cited intelligence report puts it. "For other measures, moreover, it would have been imperative to have the agreement of the European service, which led the possible source in the Ukrainian General Staff and was responsible for its security."

FDP foreign policy expert Lechte concedes that Germany could possibly have intensified surveillance measures in the Baltic Sea, but he cannot see a fundamental failure on the part of the German government. "Anyone who knows the business of intelligence services knows that sometimes false information is deliberately fed into the system," says the FDP politician. "If politicians were to act immediately after every such report as if it were the truth, we would have hopeless chaos in the world."

Even after the sensational "Washington Post" report, the public is as smart as ever about the fundamental aspects of the Nord Stream sabotage. Frigate Captain Göran Swistek hopes that examinations of the explosives detected by Swedish investigators will help clarify the origin of the perpetrators. Still, he remains skeptical: "I don't believe we'll get a clear picture in the coming days and weeks."

[NZZ German Link]
------------------


What would be interesting to know is whether the remaining fourth pipeline that did not blow up intentioanlly was spared, or whether it was tried to explode it but it failed for technical mishaps, or whether those doing the deed for some reason ran out of time at the end to complete the preparation.