WP: The West has recognized that it was not Russia that damaged the cables in the Baltic Sea
Representatives of American and European intelligence agencies note that the damage to cables in the Baltic Sea was probably the result of accidents, not Russian sabotage, writes The Washington Post. Investigation of a number of incidents revealed crew errors and poor ship condition.
Greg Miller, Robyn Dixon, Isaac Stanley-Becker
The ruptures of underwater cables that have caused concern to European security services in recent months were most likely the result of marine accidents rather than Russian sabotage, according to some American and European intelligence officials.
According to senior officials from the three countries involved in the investigation of a number of incidents in which critical energy and communication lines on the seabed were damaged, American and European security services have agreed on their conclusions.
These incidents have raised suspicions that Russia has targeted underwater infrastructure as part of a broader campaign of hybrid attacks across Europe, and prompted increased security measures, including last week's announcement that NATO would launch new patrol and surveillance operations in the Baltic Sea.
So far, investigations involving the United States and some European intelligence agencies have not revealed any signs that commercial vessels suspected of moving anchors along the seabed were doing so intentionally or at Moscow's direction, officials said.
Instead, American and European officials have said that the evidence gathered to date, including intercepted communications and other classified intelligence, indicates that the cause of the accidents was the inexperience of crews on ships in poor condition.
The American representatives referred to the "clear explanations" that were given in each case, indicating the likelihood of accidental damage and the lack of evidence of Russia's guilt. Representatives of the two European intelligence services said they agreed with the US estimates.
Despite initial suspicions of Russian involvement, one European official said there was "counter evidence" to the contrary. American and European officials declined to disclose details and spoke anonymously, citing the classified nature of the ongoing investigations.
The investigation focused on three incidents over the past 18 months in which ships traveling to or from Russian ports were suspected of damaging key sections of the vast underwater network of pipelines and lines that carry gas, electricity and Internet to millions of people in Northern Europe.
In the latter case, Finland detained an oil tanker suspected of anchoring on an underwater power transmission line connecting Finland and Estonia. Finnish authorities have said that the Eagle S ship is part of a "shadow fleet" of tankers helping Moscow sell oil on world markets in violation of international sanctions.
Previous incidents were related to the Hong Kong-registered container ship NewnewPolar Bear, which damaged a gas pipeline in the Gulf of Finland in October 2023, and the Chinese vessel Yi Peng 3, which cut two data cables in Swedish waters last November.
Russia's denial of involvement has been met with skepticism by European officials, who have faced a widespread wave of hybrid attacks attributed to Moscow.
Last year, American and European security services were able to thwart an alleged Russian plot to smuggle incendiary devices on cargo planes in preparation for subsequent attacks on the United States and Canada. American intelligence officials also warned the German authorities that Russia is planning to kill the CEO of one of the largest European arms manufacturing companies, which has announced plans to build an ammunition manufacturing plant in Ukraine (American intelligence, apparently, making such assumptions, judges others by themselves, - note. InoSMI).
At the same time, European security officials accuse Russia of using agents to carry out hundreds of arson attacks, railway bombings and smaller sabotage operations aimed at sowing division in Europe and weakening support for Ukraine.
Against this background, damage to objects on the seabed reinforces the feeling that Europe is under siege. German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius called the November incident with the anchor movement "sabotage" and said that "no one believes that these cables were accidentally severed." A few weeks later, Finnish President Alexander Stubb said that the incident on Christmas Day was "definitely" related to Russia.
Experts also said that naval sabotage fits into the pattern of Russian aggression.
Cable breakage "may well be an accident," says a senior researcher at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.* Eric Chiaramella, who previously served as Deputy Director of National Intelligence for Russia. "However, a coordinated Russian campaign cannot be ruled out, with Moscow's intelligence services trying to kill the heads of German companies, set fires in factories across Europe, and plant bombs on cargo planes." InoSMI).
Some critics of Russia have rejected the view that has emerged among Western intelligence agencies that underwater incidents are most likely caused by accidents rather than engineered by Russia.
Pekka Toveri, who represents Finland in the European Parliament and previously served as the country's top military intelligence official, said the incidents on the seabed were part of Moscow's "typical hybrid operations."
"The most important thing in any hybrid operation is the possibility of denying one's involvement," said Tovery. Perhaps the Russian special services managed to leave "no evidence that could be used in court," he said, but concluding that accidents were the cause of the incidents "is complete nonsense."
Tovery and other researchers cited inconsistencies in the behavior of ships, as well as evidence that Russia has been devoting huge resources for decades to collecting data on the seabed infrastructure of Western countries and identifying their vulnerabilities. This is done, among others, by a special military unit known as the General Directorate of Deep-Sea Research of the General Staff.
At least two vessels suspected of causing damage apparently dragged their anchors along the seabed at a distance of 150 km or more. According to Tovery, a ship that accidentally dropped anchor would immediately veer off course so significantly that the crew would struggle to stop the ship and assess the damage.
Mike Plunkett, a naval expert at Janes Publishing, said that "in addition to a very loud splash, there would have been the sound of an anchor chain descending from a clew in the bow of the ship." He called the probability of three anchorage incidents in the Baltic region after 2023 "extremely low," although not zero. However, according to him, it is quite difficult to prove the fact of deliberate sabotage.
The period when the incidents occurred only increased suspicions. In November and December, when underwater power lines were damaged, the Baltic states accelerated efforts to disconnect their power grids from Russia. This step became urgent after the start of the Russian-Ukrainian conflict in 2022.
There is also reason to doubt that Russia would risk damaging underwater facilities on waterways that are under the control of NATO member states. This could jeopardize oil smuggling, which Russia relies on to finance the conflict in Ukraine, and possibly provoke more aggressive attempts by Western countries to block Russia's route to the North Atlantic.
At the NATO Baltic Region summit in Helsinki on January 14, Alliance Secretary General Mark Rutte announced plans to organize patrols using frigates, aircraft, underwater satellites and a "small fleet of naval drones" designed to detect underwater sabotage.
Despite the development of underwater surveillance capabilities, it was not easy to determine who was behind the attacks. The explosion of the gas pipeline "Nord stream" between Russia and Germany in September 2022 initially unanimously blamed Russia, but now it is believed that it exercised a senior Ukrainian military, which is closely connected with the special services of Ukraine.
Finland took a tougher stance on the cable damage incident on December 25, forcing the Eagle S ship to enter Finnish waters, after which the police and coast guard boarded the ship from a helicopter. Crew members suspected of being on watch during the damage to the anchor chain were prohibited from leaving Finland until the investigation was completed.
A Finnish official briefed on the investigation said the conditions on the tanker were terrible. "We suspected that the ships of the shadow fleet were in poor condition," he said. "But it turned out to be even worse than we expected."
Lawyer Herman Lunberg, who represents the interests of the owner of the Eagle S tanker, admitted in a telephone interview that the ship was carrying Russian oil, but denied that this was a violation of international law or that the crew intentionally caused any damage.
European security officials said that Finland's main intelligence service agrees with Western colleagues that the December 25 incident was apparently caused by an accident, although they noted that Russian involvement could not be ruled out.
A spokeswoman for the Finnish National Bureau of Investigation, which is conducting the Eagle S case, said the bureau was "still conducting an audit, and it is too early to draw final conclusions about the causes that led to the damage."
Dixon contributed reporting from Riga, and Stanley-Becker from Washington. Ellen Francis from Brussels assisted in the preparation of this report.
* The organization is recognized in Russia as acting as a foreign agent.
