I do think the contract reason is also very plausible. If the pipeline is damaged by unknown persons, then financial penalties from unfulfilled contractual obligations might be avoided, in a manner they probably wouldn’t be by openly turning off the supply with the intention to freeze/punish the other party to the contract. I think that all parties understood the future of the Nord Stream project to be dead at this point.
Russia clearly believed they could pressure Europe to cease aiding Ukraine by cutting off heating during winter. This would have helped those efforts, while attempting to shift blame elsewhere.
The motive was to convince people that Ukraine or a pro-Ukraine actor blew up the pipeline. Double-bluff. A false false flag. Russia intelligence thinking must have been, “They’ll never think we did it. We had the most to lose!”
My personal perception as a resident is, remarkably well, through a combination of aggressive planning, better-than-usual coordination between normally fractious European states (better than usual being defined as “any at all”), and, probably more than any other factor, an unusually warm winter.
I’m not seeing a lot of news about it, but according to Denys Davidov, the Russians apparently struck an ammunition depot near Pavlohrad yesterday. Its geographic location and the size of the explosion both suggest it was for munitions intended for the upcoming Ukrainian counter-offensive. I have a bad feeling about this.
OSINT twitter thinks it was a warehouse storing old S-24 (solid fuel ICBM) motors that were scheduled for decommissioning, said decommissioning languishing due to lack of funds to carry it out. I can’t find any of the relevant tweets atm, but earlier this morning I did read multiple to that effect including some geolocation analysis of the explosion videos.
This could also be misinformation spread by Ukraine to cover a serious loss of materiel, of course.