From: allin
The Nordstream pipeline explosion in September 2022 generated significant media attention and raised questions about responsibility and geopolitical implications.
Initial Reactions and Blame
Initially, the media’s focus on the event was compared to the attention given to the Chinese balloon incident, suggesting the balloon received more attention than the Nordstream explosion [00:03:46]. The lack of sustained coverage for Nordstream was attributed to it not being an ongoing story [00:05:13]. The mainstream media quickly adopted a narrative, with the U.S. administration stating that Russians were responsible, framing it as “self-sabotage” [00:05:27]. This narrative was “repeated endlessly” by the media [00:05:35].
However, the idea of Russia self-sabotaging its own “economically vital asset” and “main source of leverage over Europe” did not “make sense to anyone who’s paying attention” [00:05:45]. This quick conclusion by the administration and media suggested it might have been a “cover story” [00:06:08]. Those who questioned the U.S. involvement were often labeled “conspiracy theorists” or “Putin stooges” [00:14:21]. Media montages compiled by Matt Orphelia showed a consistent “party line” being repeated across various news outlets, implying a coordinated narrative [00:18:31].
Seymour Hersh’s Investigation
Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Seymour Hersh published a detailed story alleging that the U.S. was responsible for the Nordstream explosion [00:06:23]. Hersh, known for breaking major stories like the My Lai massacre during the Vietnam War and the Abu Ghraib prison abuses during the Iraq War, has a history of exposing covert military actions that were initially denied by authorities [00:06:35].
Hersh’s report outlined the details of how the operation was allegedly carried out, including the specific steps, explosives used, and divers involved [00:12:00]. Despite the CIA’s strong denial, calling the claim “pure fiction” [00:07:22], the detailed nature of Hersh’s single-source report led some to find it more plausible than the official narrative [00:09:37].
U.S. Statements and Motives
Before the war in Ukraine invasion, President Biden publicly stated that if Russia invaded, Nordstream “would be no more,” and when pressed on how, he replied, “we have ways” [00:08:24]. Victoria Nuland, Deputy Secretary of State, made similar statements about stopping Nordstream if Russia invaded [00:08:42].
After the pipelines were blown up, Secretary of State Antony Blinken referred to the event as a “wonderful opportunity,” praising its benefits [00:08:52]. Nuland also expressed satisfaction, stating, “I’m sure we’re all very glad that it’s a hunk of metal at the bottom of the sea” [00:09:00]. The perceived benefits for the U.S. included shifting European energy dependence from Russian gas to American gas [00:09:06]. This combination of telegraphing intentions, demonstrating capability, and having a clear motive made Hersh’s story plausible to some observers [00:09:15].
Plausible Scenarios and Risks
While the administration officially denied involvement, some speculated about alternative scenarios, such as the CIA facilitating the operation for Ukraine or other collaborators like the UK or Norway, maintaining “plausible deniability” [00:11:10]. The idea that the U.S. would undertake such a “provocative act,” essentially an act of war against a country with thousands of nuclear weapons, was considered a “scary situation” [00:10:19]. It would also contradict Biden’s initial promise to keep the U.S. from being directly involved in the war in Ukraine [00:10:30].
Poland’s former foreign minister, Radek Sikorski, notably tweeted “Thank you USA” with a photo of the pipeline explosion, further fueling speculation of U.S. involvement [00:15:25].
German/European Perspective
The Nordstream pipeline was economically vital to Germany [00:17:10]. It was suggested that if the U.S. blew it up, Germany would need to have been informed beforehand, with a quid pro quo involving guaranteed U.S. gas supply to Europe [00:17:24]. Germany’s public position was simply that it was an act of “sabotage” [00:21:30].
The destruction of Nordstream means Germany no longer has access to cheap natural gas from Russian pipelines, potentially causing lasting economic hardship given its industrial economy [00:21:47]. This situation could lead to political trouble for German Chancellor Olaf Scholz for aligning with the U.S. [00:22:11]. There is a “growing political opposition” and “war fatigue” within Germany regarding the war in Ukraine [00:22:17].
Geopolitical Implications
The event highlighted a perceived orientation toward “external conflict” in global geopolitics, driven by factors like increasing national debt, wealth disparity, and inflation [00:23:00]. This perspective suggests that ongoing conflict benefits the military-industrial complex [00:23:49]. Military leaders were observed to be focused on “escalation” rather than “de-escalation” or “resolution” [01:00:00].
This situation aligns with warnings about the military-industrial complex made by former President Dwight D. Eisenhower in his farewell address in 1961 [02:59:00]. The American people, it was argued, do not want war with Russia and would prefer government spending to address domestic issues like crime and homelessness [02:57:00].
Energy and Economic Outlook
The discussion also touched on the broader economic challenges facing the U.S., particularly its ability to meet financial obligations like Social Security and Medicare [01:31:39]. The U.S. Treasury’s forecast shows a “runaway debt scenario” leading to an eventual default if current trends continue without cuts to entitlement programs or significant tax increases [01:32:03]. Increased taxes, however, could stifle economic growth [01:33:03].
The solution to these financial issues could lie in an “energy miracle,” such as breakthroughs in fusion energy that drastically reduce energy costs and increase capacity [01:41:12]. While China is seen as a leader in solar deployment, the key challenge for abundant, zero-cost energy remains scalable storage solutions [01:43:01]. This energy transformation could foster economic growth, providing a path out of mounting debt and entitlement problems [01:42:06].