Deutshce Welle international news is calling them “leaks” although all European governments seem to acknowledge that sabotage “cannot be ruled out.” Here is a video excerpt of DW news.
James Cameron is the designated enemy of the SDMB since he had the gall to go in to the Marianas Trench for more than 20 minutes and not in the 1960’s.
I think we should pin this on him and hopefully get him kidnapped by the FSB.
There are a few possibilities.
- A big motivation in Russia’s actions is deflecting blame. With Russia’s economy on the rocks due to sanctions, Putin can now point to pipeline sabotage and say “the economic situation isn’t my doing, NATO blew up the pipes.”
- Related to the above, Russia has now created a pretext for other sabotage on other undersea utilities (internet cables, etc)
- Putin could be concerned that rivals/aspiring successors could be cutting deals with Europe behind his back: “if you agree to resume gas purchases at X price on D date, we’ll shove Putin off a balcony and pull our forces out of Ukraine.”
I don’t know whether those reflect the reality of what happened, but they realistically reflect reasons why Russia might act this way.
Another theory that’s going around: The 20-year Gazprom contract would require Russia to pay some sort of penalty if they abrogated it before 2026, but not if it were due to some “act of God” (such as the pipeline accidentally cutting itself in half). I find this unlikely, because being liable for a penalty seems the least of Russia’s problems (and the most ignorable), but it’s a thing people are saying.
Moderator Action
I don’t know if we are going to be able to get a factual answer for this. Since a lot of speculation is going to be necessary here, let’s move this to IMHO (from FQ).
Any factual information is of course still welcome.
It will sell it to nobody, because it cannot divert the gas from the Western pipeline network to the Asian pipeline network. They are not well connected. Russia is already burning the gas that it no longer sells to Germany/Europe! It can or will not stop the flow and it can not divert it.
Concerning the OP, it is all highly speculative now, good that it has become IMHO. After some reading and thinking, it does not make obvious sense for anyone to blow the pipeline up to me, not to the level that justifies what seems to me to be a huge risk, reputational and political, if found out. I cannot find a good reason why. So I will list the candidates that could have done it instead. Of the top of my head:
The UK. They (think they) have the panache. James Bond and all that! Liz Truss! The Mossad. They are the main suspects in so many movies! Or the French. But they would probably have screwed up. Perhaps they actually have. The US? See → The French. Russia. If you want to commit suicide, why not commit it quickly? China. Makes no sense. North Korea? No, they are probably not capable of that. An environemental organisation! Would have to be a new one to me, because neither PETA nor Greenpeace make any sense. Germany. Cut the pipeline so as not to fall into temptation. Hmmm… Germans have done stupider things…
Any better idea someone?
I don’t know if it is a “better” idea but I think some corporations might deserve some consideration here. If Germany is not buying gas from Russia it needs to get its energy from somewhere else. Be it renewables or buying natgas from someone else or coal/nuclear wants to make a comeback. Since that is expensive they want to ensure there is no going back to Nord Stream.
As always, follow the money.
Looks like today was ALSO the launch date for the Baltic Pipe:
Having the one blow up on the same day that the new alternative/competitor launch seems pretty suspicious.
I would still vote on Poland, though the project seems to be being managed by the EU:
So, the EU might finally be stepping up to protect its interests.
I did say “will”. 
Is there any way that shutting off the gas could have led to these failures? Either because there is too much pressure in the pipeline, or not enough? Or for some other reason? Maybe we are overthinking the ‘sabotage’ angle.
One leak sure but three in really quick succession? Maybe once one leak started that caused a chain reaction (IANAPipeline engineer) but it would be remarkable to me if such pipelines were engineered that such a thing could happen (where one hole leads to lots of other holes).
But, I really do not know.
In my OP I speculated about, and quickly discounted, the notion that Russia might have sabotaged the pipeline for fear that pro-Ukrainian forces would seize the Russian gas fields in the near future. But your explanation is a lot more plausible: it doesn’t have to be an external anti-Russian force taking control of the gas supply; it might just be an internal rival to Putin who intends to use the resumption of the gas supply as a bargaining chip with the West. So it might not be Russia at large so much as Putin himself that benefits from taking the pipeline out of commission.
All the bubbling at the surface sure looks like a pipe was in use when it burst.
My guess is that it was someone pro-Ukraine who did it, to remove the possibility of Putin telling Western Europe “If you stop helping Ukraine, I’ll give you gas”.
But if I let my imagination run wild, how about mercenaries, who made deals with Ukraine and other energy companies and China, and anyone else who had an interest in it, and who are now doing the “We got paid twice!” happy dance?
Seismologists have interpreted the event as an explosion.
I believe that’s just because the pipe was full of gas, not because the gas was actually flowing. And I’m no pipeline engineer, but I’d speculate that the pipe needs to stay full of gas in order to maintain pressure under all that water.
It seems Nord Stream 2 was never opened for business:
Germany on Tuesday halted the Nord Stream 2 Baltic Sea gas pipeline project, designed to double the flow of Russian gas direct to Germany, after Russia formally recognised two breakaway regions in eastern Ukraine.
Europe’s most divisive energy project, worth $11 billion, was finished in September, but has stood idle pending certification by Germany and the European Union. SOURCE
The risk is so high, who would do that? Who could be such a fool? Bolsonaro? Brazil can’t supply Europe. Mexico? The same. BP? Aramco? RoyalDutschShell? They do have the equipment and the know-how to do mischief under water to pipes, but would they? Really?
The more I think about it, the more a maverick actor seems likely. It is absurd to blow this pipeline up.
No, it was just full.
It was filled at 105 bars:
Nord Stream 2’s operator said pressure in the pipeline, which had contained some gas sealed inside despite never becoming operational, dropped from 105 to 7 bars overnight.
Writes Reuters.
Yes! That would be so outrageous and deserved!
I do not think a corporation would do something like this all on their own. But corporations have huge sway within governments. Remember that the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company (which later became British Petroleum) got the US and Great Britain to overthrow the democratically elected leader in Iran in the 50s (Mosaddegh).
I don’t know if that was not the tail waging the dog: did the AIOC get the US and the UK to overthrow Iran’s government or did the CIA and/or MI6 use the AIOC as a cover? Which oil company could get which state to do that for them today? Or which state could use which oil company as a cover or excuse?
A maverick doing something foolish is for me the most plausible idea, but plausibility and truth can be very far apart.
All I am saying is that blowing up this pipeline does not make much rational sense to me now. But it looks like somebody did that, the explosion was probably no accident, so somebody has made a different calculation. I guess they have more information than I do.
Oh, and to further entertain my wild “mercenaries with multiple clients” hypothesis, it has the added benefit of plausible deniability for each of the clients: If the mercenaries get caught, then each of the clients can say that they were working on behalf of one of the others.
Back in the USSR … days, allegedly the Americans (the CIA will neither confirm nor deny) planted some trojan horse software flaws in pump technology the Russians stole. Apparently when they applied the tech to pipelines, it caused a massive explosion when a gas supply pipeline burst in the dead of winter. The entire town of Norilsk was without gas supplies and had to be evacuated.
Maybe the Russians are short of parts and had to pull some ancient tech off the old storage shelves to try to keep their pipeline running.