This isn't the first time Hersh has done this in recent years. Several years ago, he purported there was credible evidence the Syrian resistance had been behind the chemical attacks back in 2013 (I forget the site now). I replied in the comments of that article that I had SEEN the intercepted intelligence (as reported by BBC about a month after the attack--I was working the Syria problem set at USCENTCOM at that time. And yes, I read the intel myself) that confirmed it was government forces, and he replied that since I could not produce the report it could not be considered factual or provable (other conspiracy theorists commenting on his "reporting" also jumped in and challenged my credibility. Oh yes). What a jackelope.
It still doesn't anwer my big question about this sabatoge. Who on earth benefited? If it was a pro-Ukrainian source all I can say is those responsible had access to high levels of technical expertise and Dumbo levels of strategic judgement. There was absolutely no need for it. Russian gas sales to Europe were well on the way to dying and there was no way on earth they were going to be resurrected. No-one's interested in an unreliable seller.
So why would the UKR's government have wanted to do this? As you point out, Europe was already moving towards energy independence. RU had already been at least talking about turning off or limiting gas supplies. With EUR moving to aid UKR, why would the UKR want to run the risk of being found responsible for this act of sabotage seemingly aimed at Europeans who were helping them?
This isn't the first time Hersh has done this in recent years. Several years ago, he purported there was credible evidence the Syrian resistance had been behind the chemical attacks back in 2013 (I forget the site now). I replied in the comments of that article that I had SEEN the intercepted intelligence (as reported by BBC about a month after the attack--I was working the Syria problem set at USCENTCOM at that time. And yes, I read the intel myself) that confirmed it was government forces, and he replied that since I could not produce the report it could not be considered factual or provable (other conspiracy theorists commenting on his "reporting" also jumped in and challenged my credibility. Oh yes). What a jackelope.
It still doesn't anwer my big question about this sabatoge. Who on earth benefited? If it was a pro-Ukrainian source all I can say is those responsible had access to high levels of technical expertise and Dumbo levels of strategic judgement. There was absolutely no need for it. Russian gas sales to Europe were well on the way to dying and there was no way on earth they were going to be resurrected. No-one's interested in an unreliable seller.
Don't know about that. Germany has the constant temptation to return to Ostpolitik.
Ostpolitik was never a good idea, but removing then pipeline weakens it's purported value even further.
So why would the UKR's government have wanted to do this? As you point out, Europe was already moving towards energy independence. RU had already been at least talking about turning off or limiting gas supplies. With EUR moving to aid UKR, why would the UKR want to run the risk of being found responsible for this act of sabotage seemingly aimed at Europeans who were helping them?
Who actually did it is immaterial. Who was behind who did it is material.