Poland and Ukraine as suspects in the Nord Stream 2 pipeline bombing

Veteran national security reporter James Bamford has a new analysis of the Nord Stream 2 pipeline bombing that focuses on the motives, means, and opportunity that Poland and Ukraine may have had to carry out the bombing.¹

Bamford refers to Seymour’s Hersh’s report² that the US itself carried out the bombing: “Nor, beyond reporter Seymour Hersh’s elaborate, largely unsourced and self-published allegations, is there any evidence or indication that the United States itself was behind the blasts.”

While his comment on Hersh isn’t necessarily complimentary, Bamford isn’t arguing that Hersh is wrong. What he calls Hersh’s “largely unsourced … allegations” do in fact rely heavily on a single source. I’ve commented on Hersh’s story here before.³

Bamford also does not specify anyone as the probable or actual perpetrator. But he does describe in some detail that both Poland and Ukraine likely have the technical means to have pulled off the Nord Stream 2 sabotage. And he discusses the diplomatic context, which of course is complicated.

James Bamford (photo)⁴

The Nord Stream 2 pipeline was a joint Russian-German program that would supply additional natural gas supplies from Russia to Germany and the EU. Ukraine had previously “made great profits in transit fees as Russian gas passed through its pipelines to Europe,“ which the Nord Stream 1 and 2 projects would “largely end.“ Part of the reason behind the projects was to promote business between the EU and Russia and thereby increase their mutual dependence on each other. In the optimistic free-trade ideology that has been dominant in the US and the EU, that should have made both NATO and Russia less likely to engage in military aggressions against each other.

But from Ukraine’s point of view, it also reduced Ukraine’s strategic value for the West and therefore made them more vulnerable to Russian attacks. The Trump Administration imposed sanctions to block completion the Nord Stream 2, which delayed construction for about a year. This is something to remember when people refer to Trump’s policy as being totally subservient to Russia, as “Russiagate“ Democrats are tempted to do. But it was also an act by the US against the perceived interest of Germany and most of the EU.

Poland has generally taken a notably hawkish stance toward Russia. And they were also opposed to the pipeline’s being completed. When contruction resumed in early 2021:

In early April, Andrey Minin, a senior official at the Nord Stream 2 AG consortium, charged that the Fortuna and other ships involved in the project had been the target of “regular provocations,” including the penetration of the 1.5-mile security perimeter surrounding the worksite.

And Bamford observes, “By 2022, Ukraine certainly had a motive to ‘put an end to’ Nord Stream 2. And beyond public view, it also had the means to carry out such an operation.”

However, the fact that the classical trio of means-motives-opportunity were possibly there for both Poland and Ukraine does not mean that there is clear evidence in the public record that they did it. The Swedish government is holding a criminal investigation into the incident. Bamford quotes a senior Swedish prosecutor involved saying, “Do I think it was Russia that blew up Nord Stream? I never thought so. It’s not logical.”

But aside from whatever laws were broken by the sabotage, there are also some serious political implications for cooperation within NATO and the EU. If Poland or the US bombed the pipelines to militarily block an important economic and foreign policy goal of Germany and other EU countries, that could have some major repercussions politically.

Bamford emphasizes that (let’s get real) the United States either knows for certain or has a very good idea who actually did the sabotage in this particular “act of war”:

Given the fact that the United States has long had the seafloor of the Baltic secretly bugged, with the ability to identify and geolocate passing vessels, combined with the presence of reconnaissance planes within a few hours of the explosions, it is highly likely that the US knows far more about what happened, and who is responsible, then it is revealing. And while there is little evidence of direct US involvement, and even less that Russia blew up its own pipeline, a number of indications clearly point to Ukraine and Poland.

The involvement of close allies in the pipeline destruction would also explain Washington’s defining [sic] silence on the attack. And the recent leak of Pentagon documents shows how many secrets about the war the administration is keeping from the public. But Americans need to know whether the country they are supporting with over $113 billion in aid and military assistance deliberately targeted fellow NATO countries and the people of Europe with a massive act of war. [my emphasis]

1. Bamford, James (2023): The Nord Stream Explosions: New Revelations About Motive, Means, and Opportunity. The Nation 05/05/2023. <https://www.thenation.com/article/world/nordstream-pipeline-explosions/> (Accessed: 2023-05-05).

2. Hersh, Seymour (2023): How America Took Out The Nord Stream Pipeline. Substack 02.08.2023. (Accessed 2023-09-02).

3. Russia-Ukraine War, differences among Ukraine's allies, peace talks in 2022, and that mysterious Nord Stream pipeline sabotage 02/09/2023. <https://brucemillerca.substack.com/p/russia-ukraine-war-differences-among>

Sy Hersh's claim on the Nord Stream pipeline bombing draws a (weak-tea) rebuke from the EU's (anti-) disinformation crew 02/20/2023. <https://brucemillerca.substack.com/p/sy-hershs-claim-on-the-nord-stream>

Three big questions that Congress and the public need to be asking on US policy in the Russia-Ukraine War 03/18/2023. <https://brucemillerca.substack.com/p/three-big-questions-that-congress>

4. Photo from: James Bamford. Wikipedia 09/10/2013. <https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:SJP1416_(9717460065).jpg> (Accessed 2023-08-05).