Three crazy theories of who blew up the Nord Stream pipelines | Pinch Point

Key Concepts

• Nordstream Pipelines: A network of underwater natural gas pipelines running from Russia to Germany under the Baltic Sea.
• Industrial Sabotage: The deliberate destruction or damage of industrial facilities or infrastructure.
• HMX (Octogen): A powerful military-grade explosive.
• Andromeda Yacht: A rented vessel allegedly used in the Nordstream sabotage.
• Interdependence Theory: A foreign policy concept suggesting that economic ties can deter conflict.
• False Flag Operation: A covert operation designed to deceive in such a way that it appears to have been carried out by another entity.
• Liquid Natural Gas (LNG): Natural gas that has been cooled into a liquid state for easier transport.
• European Arrest Warrant: A judicial order issued by a member state of the European Union for the arrest and surrender of a person by another member state.

Nordstream Pipeline Sabotage Investigation

The Attack and Initial Theories

The Nordstream pipelines, a critical energy link between Russia and Western Europe, were sabotaged in September 2022, resulting in three leaks across two pipelines within 24 hours. This event, described as the largest methane release on record, was quickly concluded to be sabotage by the EU and NATO. Investigations were launched by Germany, Denmark, and Sweden, but no group claimed responsibility.

Initial theories pointed to several potential culprits with competing motives:

• Russia (Vladimir Putin): The transcript questions how Putin would order an attack on his own pipelines.
• Ukraine (Zelenskyy): A theory involving Ukrainian scuba divers using explosives on a rented German yacht.
• United States (Joe Biden): A possibility involving a CIA special ops team, potentially during a Norwegian maritime parade.

Each of these entities had potential gains from severing the pipelines and disrupting economic ties between Russia and Western Europe.

German Investigation and the Andromeda Yacht

German police focused on a theory involving a 15-meter yacht named the Andromeda, rented from the German port town of Rostock. On a crisp autumn morning in early September 2022, five men and one woman allegedly loaded the yacht with scuba gear and oxygen tanks. They sailed to a location near the Danish island of Bornholm, where four divers descended 80 meters to rig Nordstream 1 with timed explosives. The yacht then moved to another location to repeat the process on Nordstream 2.

A significant break in the case came when police searched the Andromeda at Rostock and found traces of HMX (Octogen), a powerful military explosive, along with fingerprints, DNA, and eyewitness accounts of six people unloading oxygen tanks. The group was described as two diving instructors, two diving assistants (one a soldier), a coordinator, and a financier with a Ukrainian Google account.

The Vadimir Zuravlev Lead and its Disappearance

In 2024, investigators identified a white Citroen van with a Ukrainian license plate captured by a speed camera driving towards Rostock on September 8, 2022, two days after the Andromeda was rented. Witnesses identified the driver as Vadimir Zuravlev, a Ukrainian diving instructor living in Poland. A European arrest warrant was issued, but Polish authorities were slow to comply. By the time the paperwork was completed, Zuravlev had reportedly disappeared into Ukraine. Some German officials accused Polish authorities of tipping him off. This led to the case going cold, with Denmark and Sweden closing their investigations.

The Arrest of Serge Khnets

On August 20, 2025, nearly three years after the attack, a retired Ukrainian soldier named Serge Khnets was arrested in Italy while checking into a hotel with his family. His passport scan alerted Italian police, leading to his arrest. Khnets, 49, became the first arrest in the three-year investigation.

Questions and Controversies Surrounding Nordstream

The German investigation's narrative raises several questions:

• How did the divers know the precise locations to target the pipelines?
• How did they evade German coast guards and patrolling submarines in a heavily monitored area?
• Why would an actor go to such lengths to stop gas flow from Russia to Germany?

These questions are linked to the historical context and controversy surrounding the Nordstream pipelines.

Historical Context and Geopolitical Motivations

Throughout the Cold War, Europe became heavily reliant on Russian gas. Russia's state gas giant, Gazprom, profited significantly from this. In 1997, a new pipeline network, Nordstream, was proposed to run directly to Germany. Former German Chancellor Gerhard Schröder was a strong proponent of Russian energy and later joined a Russian gas company and chaired the Nordstream project.

Nordstream 1 was completed in 2011, and by 2018, Nordstream 2 was under construction to double gas flow to Germany. Germany's strategy was based on interdependence theory, believing that closer economic ties with Russia would promote peace. However, this increased Germany's connection to Russia at the expense of the Ukrainian-Russian gas transit route, which would have kept Russia dependent on Ukraine.

The United States opposed the Nordstream projects, arguing they undermined European security and that the US had its own natural gas to sell to Europe. Ukraine, having lost Crimea to Russia in 2014, also strongly opposed the pipelines, fearing further Russian aggression.

When Russia invaded Ukraine in February 2022, Europe faced an energy crisis. Sanctions on Russia led Moscow to cut off most gas supplies. Germany and France scrambled for alternative energy sources, with the US offering support. Ukrainian President Zelenskyy emphasized Europe's energy independence from Russia.

The Nordstream attack occurred a month after Zelenskyy's speech, complicating the energy crisis and Europe's ability to revert to Russian gas.

The "Follow the Money" Angle and Ukrainian Involvement

Ukraine had openly expressed its opposition to the Nordstream project. Three months before the explosion, the White House reportedly received an intelligence report indicating Ukraine was planning a pipeline sabotage operation involving a six-person team reporting to General Valeri Zaluzhnyi. The CIA allegedly warned Ukraine against it, and Washington informed NATO allies the plan was scrapped. General Zaluzhnyi has since denied the report.

Following the Nordstream explosion, a car bomb destroyed the bridge connecting Crimea to Russia in October 2022. Ukraine initially denied involvement but later admitted to organizing the attack.

Germany, a major ally of Ukraine, found itself in a difficult position. While issuing warrants for Ukrainian citizens in relation to the pipeline attack, they stopped short of accusing the Ukrainian government. A former German intelligence chief suggested the attack likely required approval at the highest political level and possibly involved Polish intelligence.

Poland also opposed Nordstream and the growing German-Russian relationship, potentially due to historical fears of invasion. However, there is no proof of Polish involvement in the sabotage or of them knowingly aiding Zuravlev's escape.

The "False Flag" Theory and Russian Involvement

Despite the arrest of two Ukrainians, the Ukrainian government maintains its innocence, suggesting implicated nationals could have been Russian loyalists or that the attack was a false flag operation. This theory posits that Ukrainians might have been tricked into believing they were working for Ukrainian intelligence (SBU) when in fact the FSB (Russian Federal Security Service) was behind it.

This scenario implies Vladimir Putin may have blown up his own $20 billion pipelines. The motive could be to avoid billions in damages and lawsuits from European energy companies, as Gazprom faced legal action for undelivered gas.

Some European officials initially accused Russia, citing the sophistication of the attack and Russia's submarine fleet in the Baltic Sea. The theory suggests Russian submarines could have been used, with the Andromeda and its crew hired to mislead investigators.

Russia, a global pariah at the time, could have used the attack to shift the narrative from aggressor to victim of sabotage. However, Russia itself has denied involvement, calling the idea of amateur divers behind the blast a "fairy tale" and suggesting it was a cover for confessions by US officials regarding US involvement.

The US Involvement Theory (Seymour Hersh)

Veteran investigative reporter Seymour Hersh published a report in 2023 accusing the Biden administration of authorizing an operation to plant remote explosives on the Nordstream pipelines. According to Hersh's reporting, President Biden, after failing to convince Germany to scrap Nordstream 2, involved the CIA. The CIA allegedly used the annual BALTOPS NATO naval drills in the Baltic Sea in June 2022 as cover to conduct the operation. US naval vessels were reportedly spotted near the pipelines with their transponders on days before the explosion.

Much of Hersh's reporting relies on a single anonymous source, leading many journalists to dismiss it. However, Russia has promoted this narrative. President Biden's prior statements, such as "If Russia invades... then there will be no longer a Nordstream 2. We will bring an end to it," are cited as evidence.

Current Status and Future Implications

Since 2022, the US has become the world's largest exporter of LNG, entering into a significant energy deal with the EU. Russia's Gazprom has recovered some losses through increased sales to China, Turkey, and India, and still supplies some gas to Europe via Black Sea pipelines. Ukraine has begun targeting Russian refineries, including the Druzhba pipeline.

The trial of Serge Khnets is pending his extradition to Germany, which his lawyers are contesting. The case could be further delayed by Poland's decision on Vadimir Zuravlev's fate.

The geopolitical landscape has shifted, with potential changes in US policy under a new administration and discussions about repairing the Nordstream pipelines. The situation highlights a complex reality where alliances are fluid, and the justification for destroying vital energy infrastructure during wartime is debated. The outcome of the trial could significantly impact the Russia-Ukraine war and the future of warfare.