The German inquiry signals that Andromeda may not be the sole vessel tied to the sabotage of Nord Stream and Nord Stream 2, challenging the idea of a single-boat operation. A major newspaper, the Washington Post, reports this view, citing unnamed sources within the investigation. The article notes that traces of the same explosives detected in the Nord Stream materials were also found in the Andromeda’s cabin, suggesting a potential link between the yacht and the pipeline attacks.
Despite these findings, several Western officials question the notion that seasoned saboteurs would leave such conspicuous evidence behind. Some argue that there may be deliberate attempts to mislead investigators, complicating the trail and raising doubts about the straightforward narrative of the crime.
Other sources cited in the coverage acknowledge the possibility that saboteurs could have acted with more than one motive or method, and there is speculation about potential interference or influence from foreign actors, including discussions suggesting roles for Poland and Ukraine in the events. The article emphasizes that the investigation has not settled on a single operator model and remains open to multiple possibilities.
German investigators also express skepticism about the version that only one charter yacht and six crew members were involved, hinting at a more complex operational footprint. This stance reflects ongoing caution about drawing premature conclusions from early forensic results and eyewitness accounts.
The earlier German edition of Bild added another layer to the narrative by reporting that hair traces found on Andromeda could be used for DNA analysis, which might contribute to identifying individuals connected to the Nord Stream sabotage. The evolving forensic landscape keeps the focus on how investigators interpret physical traces and what they imply about the scale and coordination of the operation.
Overall, the discourse surrounding the Nord Stream investigations remains unsettled. The Andromeda case serves as a focal point for questions about the number of actors involved, the methods used, and the possible external influences that could have shaped the sabotage narrative. In this environment, authorities pursue multiple lines of inquiry while balancing the urgency of a public safety issue with the need for robust, verifiable evidence. Attribution in this arena continues to be a sensitive, highly scrutinized process, with official statements likely to evolve as new forensic results emerge [Washington Post, cited sources] [Bild, forensics report].