How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[Butschi]

39 minutes ago, poesel said:

My take on the sabotage of the NS pipelines is that it is a test from Russia to see how far it can go. The 'boil the frog' thing we have talked about already.

The NS pipelines are important, but they aren't now because the gas isn't flowing anyway. The pipelines were damaged on NATO soil, but not anywhere visible enough for an article 5. The pipelines were also deliberately damaged on Swedish grounds - a NATO candidate - to send a message to them.

I guess that Russia is testing how far it can go with damaging infrastructure and what the repercussions are.

Edit: just read it was just outside of Denmark & Sweden. So one level down but still a message.

 

Assuming the Russians sabotaged the pipeline: Today I read that Ukraine wants payments from Russia for insufficient gas deliveries and gazprom threatens to switch off gas deliveries through Ukraine entirely. That doesn't really look like a coincidence.

With no chance of NS1 (or 2) going back online anytime soon, the threat of losing another transit line us much more severe plus it could harm relations between Ukraine and EU (Germany in particular).

[kevinkin]

8 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

That's not Tall Grass

Light Forest? A very useful type. 

[Lethaface]

41 minutes ago, Rokko said:

It will be interesting to see what exactly the repercussions will be, I don't think some further economic sanctions are going to cut it here. Maybe put a Kaliningrad blockade back on the menu, or send modern air-dropped ASW weapons to Ukraine (covertly) or declare to sink any Russian sub spotted anywhere near critical pipeline infrastructure. I doubt the EU has enough teeth for any of these, but they would be resolute responses.

I'd expect a rather clear declaration that any attacks on pipelines critical for NATO countries WILL trigger article 5, or maybe just a gentle reminder because an attack on critical infrastructure is within article 5 I'd say.

Now if a smoking gun is found for the attack on NS1/2 I don't expect article 5. But obviously even weak spined bureaucrats will see the need to come with some sort of tangible response in such a case. Not only a 'now don't do it again' approach.

Deployment of enlarged NATO fleet to Baltic sea seems like a potential candidate, but one can be more 'creative'. Anyway indeed interesting to see.

[Bulletpoint]

I don't see why the Russians would sabotage their own gas pipeline. As long as the pipeline exists, it's a good card in the hand of Putin; he's gambling that Europe will be so cold and miserable in winter that we will be tempted to negotiate to make him reopen the pipes. But if the pipes are kaput, there's nothing to negotiate about, at least not in the short term

[Zeleban]

7 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

I don't see why the Russians would sabotage their own gas pipeline. As long as the pipeline exists, it's a good card in the hand of Putin; he's gambling that Europe will be so cold and miserable in winter that we will be tempted to negotiate to make him reopen the pipes. But if the pipes are kaput, there's nothing to negotiate about, at least not in the short term

Probably because this card did not work in the sense in which we initially assumed and Putin had to use this card a little differently

[BornGinger]

Wasn't it Victoria Nuland that used the expression "**** the EU" in the beginning of the Ukraine crisis in 2013 or 2014? Maybe this is a part of that?

Edited September 28, 2022 by BornGinger

[Lethaface]

25 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

I don't see why the Russians would sabotage their own gas pipeline. As long as the pipeline exists, it's a good card in the hand of Putin; he's gambling that Europe will be so cold and miserable in winter that we will be tempted to negotiate to make him reopen the pipes. But if the pipes are kaput, there's nothing to negotiate about, at least not in the short term

It seems NS2 is still capable of transporting gas. 
IIRC Steve and others yesterday posted about the possibility that Putin might have wanted to deny anyone in Russia getting certain idea's. Like as in learning Putin how to fly while returning to the international fold and restart the gas operation. It's a crazy idea but the whole invasion could be summed up as a crazy idea. 

But although I think Russia is the usual suspect, it's better to await more clear information before attributing definitive blame.

Edited September 28, 2022 by Lethaface

[Lethaface]

4 minutes ago, BornGinger said:

Wasn't it Victoria Nuland that used the expression "**** the EU" in the beginning of the Ukraine crisis in 2013 or 2014? Maybe this is a part of that?

Lol, it would be a good way to kill of NATO just when it had been repurposed.

[billbindc]

20 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

I don't see why the Russians would sabotage their own gas pipeline. As long as the pipeline exists, it's a good card in the hand of Putin; he's gambling that Europe will be so cold and miserable in winter that we will be tempted to negotiate to make him reopen the pipes. But if the pipes are kaput, there's nothing to negotiate about, at least not in the short term

The key thing to remember is that already at this point, Putin is not the only Russian who might be negotiating with the West.

[The_MonkeyKing]

A massive attack on NATO countries energy infrastructure. I am waiting for the western response.

Will this (once again) be responded to only verbally or with bs?

In the past it has been OK to:
- assassinate in NATO country
- blow up ammo dumps in NATO country
- shoot at and blackmail nuclear plants in Europe

Oh, and Russia is threatening with total gas cut-off now. Most likely trying to water down the west coming response.

[billbindc]

"When he reached the New World, Cortez burned his ships. As a result his men were well motivated."

Captain Ramius, Hunt for Red October

[FancyCat]

Could be factions of the Russian government infighting. Both NS1 and NS2 were offline so no damage was done to current gas imports. Today, Gazprom threatened to stop paying Ukraine for transit of gas.

35 minutes ago, Butschi said:

 

Assuming the Russians sabotaged the pipeline: Today I read that Ukraine wants payments from Russia for insufficient gas deliveries and gazprom threatens to switch off gas deliveries through Ukraine entirely. That doesn't really look like a coincidence.

With no chance of NS1 (or 2) going back online anytime soon, the threat of losing another transit line us much more severe plus it could harm relations between Ukraine and EU (Germany in particular).

What capability does Ukraine have to take out a pipeline? Also, what reason to damage relations with the EU? If they want to keep lobbying for money and guns, all Ukraine needs to do is send Klitschko.

seems far more evident this is a threat towards the actual functioning, with gas flowing for use pipelines like the Norwegian pipes. Blow the pipelines that aren’t being used, to send a message that Russia has the ability to destroy European energy and to persuade Europe to abandon Ukraine.

[chuckdyke]

Hope this link works excellent photography.

https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/world/ukraine-defends-against-russian-invasion/ss-AAUfkyf?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=83cade17f8a2472d8cdacdaa920015b6#image=1

[Bulletpoint]

5 minutes ago, FancyCat said:

low the pipelines that aren’t being used, to send a message that Russia has the ability to destroy European energy and to persuade Europe to abandon Ukraine.

I think they sent that message pretty clear just by turning off the pipes in the first place.

We all want to blame Russia, and maybe they are to blame, who knows, But it's also possible that it's some other actor. Someone who invested heavily and needs gas prices to remain high to make a profit. There was a 'risk' that the war might end and the gas might start to flow again. Now there isn't such an option.

[LongLeftFlank]

War of Independence, indeed.

My go-to map guy (other than @Grigb) HeliosRunner has taken personal leave for the duration, so I am rooting around for decent maps (non Google).  Pfarrer uses topos, but he also covers them with textboxes and little explosion doodads and Giant Blue Arrows of Doom.  Anyway, will keep looking.  This snip was interesting.... so clearly the Zherebets above Zarichne will NOT make a viable RU defensive line, even temporarily.

 

Edited September 28, 2022 by LongLeftFlank

[akd]

47 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

he's gambling that Europe will be so cold and miserable in winter that we will be tempted to negotiate to make him reopen the pipes.

The problem is that gamble had already failed, with markets already assuming no Russian gas for winter and storage filling sufficiently to avoid crisis.  And going into next year the plan was already to end Russian gas entirely for most of Europe.

[acrashb]

9 hours ago, dan/california said:

Edit: Maybe he has acquired a certain someones habit of watching Fox news, and believing it?

If so, he would be on a plane to Beijing for a permanent vacation.  You may dislike Fox's politics; many or most (I haven't counted) of the commentators are maniacs (Tucker C?); the headlines are florid and the editorials as slanted as in any 'news' organization, but the straight reporting is sound.

Ukraine | Fox News - ignore the talking-head / commentator videos and enjoy the rest.

Compare the Fox headline - "Putin expected to seize parts of Ukraine as 'sham' referendums end today" to the Reuter's headline:   "Over 96% said to favour joining Russia in first vote results from occupied Ukraine regions" - although I will say that Reuters appears to have caught up and is now using "sham" to describe the referenda.

[Butschi]

3 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

I don't see why the Russians would sabotage their own gas pipeline. As long as the pipeline exists, it's a good card in the hand of Putin; he's gambling that Europe will be so cold and miserable in winter that we will be tempted to negotiate to make him reopen the pipes. But if the pipes are kaput, there's nothing to negotiate about, at least not in the short term

I'm at least reluctant to blame the Russians without solid proof myself. However, it does make sense once the only viable pipelines go through Ukraine. At least in Kremlin logic, Ukraine will have to decide to agree to whatever terms Russia sets - msybe this is a prelude to negotiations? - or aggravating the EU.

[Letter from Prague]

https://zpravy.aktualne.cz/domaci/vyhosteni-nemec-ukrajina/r~e156b22e3e5011edb1f50cc47ab5f122/

Czech police are prosecuting forty people for publicly supporting the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Prosecutors have already indicted the first cases and the main trial is pending. According to Aktuálně.cz, however, one case has already been sentenced. A German citizen must leave the Czech Republic for approving of Russia's armed attack on Ukraine, a court has expelled him. The verdict is not yet final.

It was March 26 of this year, one month and two days after the beginning of the Russian war in Ukraine. From the Reitzenhain - Hora Svatého Šebestián border crossing, a German citizen headed to the Czech Republic by car. He drove to the village of Přečaply, where he refueled at a gas station. Then he went to nearby Chomutov. And as Aktuálně.cz found out, this may be his last trip to the Czech Republic.

"On the glass of the back door, he had a clearly visible sheet of A4 paper stuck on the inside with a printed capital letter 'Z', size 12 by 17 centimeters, in the orange-black color of the so-called St. George's ribbon and the inscription 'We will not leave ours' in the Russian language," Aktuálně.cz reported Petr Vaněk, spokesman of the Chomutov District Court, where the German was held accountable for supporting the invasion. 

The public prosecutor indicted the German citizen in question back in March. It was then proven in court that the mentioned symbols clearly aimed to openly support the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Shortly after the start of the occupation of Ukraine, the supreme prosecutor Igor Stříž pointed out that such an attitude is criminal. And the court ruled in this vein in June.

(the crime in question is "denying, questioning, approving, and justifying genocide")

Edited September 28, 2022 by Letter from Prague

[panzermartin]

Hmmm, why should Russia blow up their own gas lines. They indeed lose their last card of changing the minds of EU. And destroying decades of prosperous collaboration with Germany. And that thank you from Poland official... We underestimate how ruthless US is as well when they are after their interests. Beyond Russia, target is Germany I think for not obeying the masters orders and being reluctant to be involved in this war. Now they don't have other choice. And we are here discussing the high ethics of the war with lord of the rings metaphors. 

[FancyCat]

There are multiple lines from Russia to Europe, aside from using Nord Stream to skip paying transit fees to Poland or Ukraine, the Nord Stream is designed to allow the gas to flow to Western Europe without pesky interference from Ukraine or Poland. Like a situation where Ukraine is being invaded and Europe refuses to assist, destroying the pipeline might be quite fair.

But Ukraine is holding out, Europe supports it, Russia is paying the transit fees, so all is well. Except this dispute threatens it. Who is the one causing issues? Maybe Ukraine, but considering Russia’s entire messaging has been a freezing Europe forced to beg Russia for gas and to stop supporting Ukraine….I really don’t think it’s not Russia.

 

5 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

I think they sent that message pretty clear just by turning off the pipes in the first place.

We all want to blame Russia, and maybe they are to blame, who knows, But it's also possible that it's some other actor. Someone who invested heavily and needs gas prices to remain high to make a profit. There was a 'risk' that the war might end and the gas might start to flow again. Now there isn't such an option.

You mean Russia? The U.S gets way more punishment in rising fuel costs worldwide fueling inflation than any benefit to increasing dependence on U.S LNG. 

No, I don’t think you understand, Norwegian LNG is a significant source of supply to the rest of Europe, it is entirely offshore. I’m assuming it is all in use. Russia blowing up one of those lines might be considered too much a escalation for NATO to ignore.

Better to blow NS 1 and NS 2 and make clear if Russia wants Europe to freeze, it can do so by destroying the Norwegian pipelines. If Europe folds in the future, the pipelines thru Ukraine and Poland remain to supply Europe.

[acrashb]

23 minutes ago, FancyCat said:

What capability does Ukraine have to take out a pipeline?

Every land pipeline, even the buried ones, have above-ground facilities to re-pressurize the flow aka "compressor stations".  So just lean across the fence and flip a switch - or more likely go to your terminal and shut the flow off with a mouse click.  With high enough pressure there can be much more distance between stations, but while I haven't checked the path and distance through Ukraine of the pipelines in question, most likely there is a station in their borders.

Or just dig down a bit and cut the pipe.  Carefully

 

[Butschi]

23 minutes ago, FancyCat said:

What capability does Ukraine have to take out a pipeline? Also, what reason to damage relations with the EU? If they want to keep lobbying for money and guns, all Ukraine needs to do is send Klitschko.

You misunderstood what I said (or I phrased it confusingly). If Russia did it and the only pipelines left go through Ukraine, Russia possibly has a lever with which to drive a wedge between Ukraine and EU.

[Bulletpoint]

9 minutes ago, akd said:

The problem is that gamble had already failed, with markets already assuming no Russian gas for winter and storage filling sufficiently to avoid crisis.  And going into next year the plan was already to end Russian gas entirely for most of Europe.

I never said it was a good plan. But a working pipeline would be a better card in Putin's hand than no pipeline.

[Harmon Rabb]

2 minutes ago, acrashb said:

If so, he would be on a plane to Beijing for a permanent vacation.  You may dislike Fox's politics; many or most (I haven't counted) of the commentators are maniacs (Tucker C?); the headlines are florid and the editorials as slanted as in any 'news' organization, but the straight reporting is sound.

Ukraine | Fox News - ignore the talking-head / commentator videos and enjoy the rest.

Compare the Fox headline - "Putin expected to seize parts of Ukraine as 'sham' referendums end today" to the Reuter's headline:   "Over 96% said to favour joining Russia in first vote results from occupied Ukraine regions" - although I will say that Reuters appears to have caught up and is now using "sham" to describe the referenda.

I'm going to second that opinion. Fox News also lost a cameraman and had a journalist lose a leg covering this war.  When I was watching Fox News early in this war,watching the brave journalists report from the ground in Ukraine and the talking heads in the studio was like watching two different networks.