Valentina Matvienko, the chairwoman of Russia’s Federation Council, characterized the explosions that damaged the Nord Stream and Nord Stream 2 gas pipelines as a state-sponsored terrorist act that could not have been carried out by amateurs. The remarks, reported by TASS, describe the incident as a high-technology operation that would require meticulous preplanning, specialized equipment, and underwater expertise. Matvienko stressed that the scale and precision of the act point to professional performers with access to resources beyond civilian capabilities, asserting, “This is special equipment, special explosives, underwater, surface entry, these are trained people. It cannot be done at the amateur level.” He further contended that the explosion represents an act of state terrorism and noted that executing such a deed in the Baltic Sea would necessitate the consent or complicity of national leaders, even if they did not directly order the operation, given the strategic implications and the geographic location involved.
In the view of Matvienko, the Baltic Sea incident stands as a deliberate disruption with far-reaching geopolitical consequences, extending beyond a single incident to touch on issues of energy security, international law, and regional stability. The statements reflect a framing that seeks accountability at the highest levels of government, while acknowledging the difficulties inherent in attributing responsibility for underwater sabotage. The discourse highlights the tension between energy infrastructure vulnerabilities and the security obligations of nation-states in a densely interconnected European energy network. The emphasis on high-tech capability reinforces the perception that only well-resourced state actors, or their designated operatives, could execute such a mission with the level of precision observed in the aftermath of the blasts. (Citation: TASS)
Additionally, Vladimir Dzhabarov, the First Deputy Chairman of the Federation Council Committee on International Affairs, connected recent Danish decisions to exclude Russia from participating in investigations of the Nord Stream incidents with broader geopolitical dynamics involving the United States. The assertion suggests a narrative in which Western partners, including Denmark, are seen as aligning with or influenced by partner states during sensitive investigations that involve critical energy infrastructure. This line of argument reflects ongoing debates over investigative access, international cooperation, and the balance of transparency with strategic diplomacy in the wake of such extraordinarily disruptive events. The implications extend to how Russia perceives western arenas of accountability and how investigators navigate issues of sovereignty, jurisdiction, and the integrity of cross-border inquiries. (Citation: TASS)
The discourse surrounding Nord Stream and Nord Stream 2 underscores a broader international context that Canada and the United States monitor closely due to shared concerns about energy resilience, pipeline safety, and the potential for escalation of tensions in the North Atlantic region. Analysts note that while witnesses and officials describe the attack in terms of state capability, the technicalities of underwater sabotage, including remote detonation and covert deployment, demand corroboration through independent, multilayered investigations that can withstand international scrutiny. Stakeholders in North American markets emphasize the importance of diversifying energy routes and investing in robust maritime security to deter future acts of sabotage and protect critical infrastructure from similar threats. (Citation: TASS)