In response to ongoing questions about the Nord Stream projects, officials in Germany and allied observers have noted that two segments of the gas infrastructure appear to be inactive. Recent assessments remind readers that, following last September’s incidents, the project could not proceed without the necessary licenses and permits. These observations come amid a broader debate about the viability and strategic purpose of the pipelines, especially in the context of shifting energy policies in North America and Europe.
Analysts and public broadcasters have suggested that sabotage or deliberate disruption may have contributed to the adverse outcomes observed in the pipeline system. According to reports from a leading public broadcaster, government resources were not allocated to the two channels of the Nord Stream pipeline, and as a result, they could not meet the technical prerequisites required to recommence operation. These statements were issued in response to parliamentary questions and are part of a larger inquiry into maintenance, safety, and control measures for critical energy infrastructure.
The question raised by a far-right parliamentary faction concerns the potential use of one of the Nord Stream 2 pipes. The inquiry comes amid broader speculation about whether the pipeline could be repurposed to re-supply gas from Russia, should political and strategic calculations shift. Public officials have reiterated that the authorization process for Nord Stream 2 was suspended early this year, noting that the broader geopolitical situation, including a Russian assault on Ukraine, substantially affects the pipeline’s prospects.
Eyewitness accounts and investigative reporting have linked the September explosions to deliberate acts of sabotage, which damaged multiple lines in the Nord Stream network. The assessments indicate that two lines of Nord Stream 1 and one line of Nord Stream 2 sustained damage that rendered them unusable for normal gas transport. The disruption has contributed to a marked reduction in Russian gas deliveries over the ensuing months, reinforcing debates about energy security, diversification, and the resilience of European energy systems in the face of external shocks.
Nord Stream 1, which began commercial operation in 2011, has since become effectively non-operational, the result of sustained reductions in gas flow and ongoing logistical challenges. The second pipeline, whose construction started in 2011, was never put into service. Officials leading the certification process halted it in February, a decision seen by many observers as a significant political signal amid broader tensions between European states and Russia.
The project, born from a 2005 agreement involving key political figures, has been central to discussions about Europe’s energy dependence on Russia for much of the past decade. Critics argue that the pipeline symbolized a strategic leverage point, while supporters contended it would bring reliable energy supplies and economic benefits. As energy strategies evolved, policymakers faced difficult choices about sanctions, diversification, and the future layout of continental energy infrastructure.