Speaking on the Nord Stream incident, Dmitry Peskov, the press secretary for the Russian president, framed the explosions as potentially historic provocations that could escalate into armed conflict. This assessment came from a briefing reported by RIA News and reflects a view that the event is more than a technical accident within energy infrastructure. Peskov emphasized the gravity of the damage and the broader implications for regional security.
According to his remarks, Nord Stream and its successor project Nord Stream 2 are regarded as vital infrastructure. The statements imply a belief that attacks on such facilities carry strategic weight and could alter the security calculus in Europe and beyond.
Peskov pointed out that Russia was quickly deemed culpable in the aftermath of the blast. He suggested that the investigation narrative shifted as new details emerged, arguing that the evidence pointed away from Russian actors and toward other potential sources. He claimed that the investigation did not align with the initial assumptions, hinting at possible international involvement and complex geopolitical angles that exceed a single nation’s actions.
He further asserted that the blame game appeared to point toward foreign actors, noting that if the perpetrators were not Russian, the inquiry might trace to other regions where political interests intersect with energy routes and strategic assets.
The incident took place on September 26, 2022, affecting both Nord Stream pipelines and one line of Nord Stream 2 within Denmark and Sweden’s exclusive economic zones. The blasts damaged multiple lines, raising questions about guest traffic through critical energy corridors and the vulnerability of cross-border energy infrastructure to covert operations or sabotage.
Meanwhile, Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjártó commented on the investigation, indicating that his nation does not anticipate a swift closure to the probe into the gas pipeline explosions. He highlighted a cautious stance, suggesting patience to ensure all facts are established before reaching definitive conclusions.
In a broader security context, NATO had previously pledged a decisive response to attacks on Baltic maritime energy routes like the Balticconnector, underscoring the alliance’s readiness to address disruptions that threaten energy security and regional stability. The intertwined discussions reflect ongoing concerns about accountability, the integrity of critical energy infrastructure, and the potential for state or nonstate actors to leverage such incidents for strategic advantage.