The Nord Stream Investigations and Diplomatic Tensions
The Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs filed a strong protest with the ambassadors of Germany, Denmark, and Sweden over the ongoing sabotage investigations in Nord Stream. Moscow notes that progress details remain hidden from its view, while its German, Danish, and Swedish counterparts have shown limited engagement with Russia on the matter.
The Russian diplomatic mission criticized what it called indifference from the involved countries in uncovering the true circumstances of the sabotage. It argued that time is being bought through delays, with attempts to obscure traces of the crime and the actual perpetrators, which Moscow believes point to well-known international actors. Simultaneously, sensational and unverified theories are reportedly leaking to media outlets, aimed at sowing confusion during the inquiry.
According to Moscow, a response to a message from Prime Minister Mikhail Mishustin, sent in October and urging a comprehensive, open inquiry with participation from Russian authorities and Gazprom, had not been received. The ministry also indicated that assessments from Russian embassies on the inquiry were not taken into account.
On May 22, the German Prosecutor General’s Office stated that the investigation into the sabotage remains active but has not produced reliable data about the organizers. It emphasized that the identities and motives of those involved are under review and that it is too early to conclude whether any state is directly responsible. The office added that all evidence is being examined to reveal the facts, and no additional data could be provided at this time.
Not a Private Service, Not a Quick Resolution
In a separate discussion, German Member of the European Parliament Gunnar Beck claimed that the European Union will not permit a genuine inquiry into the sabotage if it appears unlikely to repair the gas pipelines. He stressed that many EU members operate with limited autonomy on the international stage, and that German authorities face constraints tied to US relations, NATO, and EU frameworks, reducing their room for unilateral action.
Beck pointed to Germany’s obligations to the United States and to alliance structures, along with domestic political factors, as shaping its responses. Bruno Kahl, head of Germany’s Federal Intelligence Service, expressed confidence that no intelligence service can definitively pinpoint the orchestrator of the explosions. He noted the challenges posed by the underwater location of the pipelines in deep sea waters.
Biden Administration, Ukraine, and Diverging Narratives
Three of the four lines of the Nord Stream network were damaged by explosions on September 26, 2022, near the Danish island of Bornholm in the Baltic Sea. Denmark, Sweden, and Germany have led the official investigations, while no suspects have been publicly named yet.
In February, a prominent journalist asserted that US intelligence agencies were behind the explosions, alleging that NATO’s Baltops exercises in 2022 involved the placement of bombs. The claim suggested that an order came from President Joe Biden. A contrasting narrative emerged in March, attributed to a pro-Ukrainian faction not connected to US intelligence or the Ukrainian government. In May, a major German newspaper reported the possible involvement of two Ukrainians, citing an investigation into a Polish travel agency linked to yacht charters associated with the incident. Ukraine’s leadership has repeatedly maintained that Kyiv had no role in the sabotage and has urged the public to avoid misinformation that could slow support for Ukraine.
Estimations on the financial impact of Nord Stream’s destruction vary, with a prominent business publication estimating potential losses exceeding trillions of dollars due to damaged infrastructure, halted development plans, and long-term revenue shortfalls across the pipeline’s lifespan. Dmitry Medvedev, deputy chairman of Russia’s Security Council, argued that the United States should bear responsibility and compensation, noting that while evidence may exist, the case remains unresolved and closed in none of the official channels yet.
Throughout the inquiries, the focus has remained on understanding who planned and carried out the sabotage, the level of involvement of state actors, and the broader geopolitical ramifications. The discourse reflects competing narratives from Moscow, Brussels, Washington, and Kyiv as each side weighs responsibility, security, and the future of energy security in Europe.
References and attributions: statements from the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the German Prosecutor General’s Office, and various political and intelligence figures are cited for context in this summary. [Source attribution: Russian Foreign Ministry; German Prosecutor General’s Office; statements by Gunnar Beck; Bruno Kahl; Dmitry Medvedev].