By Greg Miller, Robyn Dixon, and Isaac Stanley-Becker, Washington Post, 1/19/25
LONDON — Ruptures of undersea cables that have rattled European security officials in recent months were likely the result of maritime accidents rather than Russian sabotage, according to several U.S. and European intelligence officials.
The determination reflects an emerging consensus among U.S. and European security services, according to senior officials from three countries involved in ongoing investigations of a string of incidents in which critical seabed energy and communications lines have been severed.
The cases raised suspicion that Russia was targeting undersea infrastructure as part of a broader campaign of hybrid attacks across Europe, and prompted stepped-up security measures including an announcement last week that NATO would launch new patrol and surveillance operations in the Baltic Sea.
But so far, officials said, investigations involving the United States and a half-dozen European security services have turned up no indication that commercial ships suspected of dragging anchors across seabed systems did so intentionally or at the direction of Moscow….
Full article here (behind paywall).
This article casts limited doubt on previous evidence-free cable and pipeline sabotage articles that WaPo published. The article is apparently a non-denial denial because it includes passages like: “The most important thing in any hybrid operation is deniability,” Toveri said. … but to conclude that they were accidents “is total B.S.” So this WaPo article casts doubt on its own retraction, a face saving maneuver that invites the reader believe whatever they wish. Such reporting falls into the conspiracy category of ‘because there is no proof Russia did it, is proof that Russia just did it with deniability.’ A second tell that the article is pure propaganda is that the writers use this opportunity (in fact most of the article) to repeat other evidence free-claims by anonymous sources of Russian sabotage including: incendiary devices on cargo planes, assassination of a German CEO, arson attacks, rail disruptions, sabotage ops aimed at sowing divisions in Europe, and the absurd Nord Stream cover-up story involving a yacht. This article fits Guy Mettan’s “Creating Russophobia” model of the ongoing Russia smear campaign: “producing the elements of language and the wordings that will be ceaselessly repeated … An easy myth must be fabricated that will lodge in the collective imagination [i.e. the Russians are coming!, the Russians are coming!] … This myth has a function … to ‘substitute the truth to better calm apprehensions and provide explanations that bring back tranquility.’ Literally, a metanarrative is ‘a narrative on reality whose function is to justify the past and the present.’” In this case, the ‘past’ has been NATO’s aggressive expansion, the 2014 coup, arming Ukraine, prodding Ukraine to bomb the Donbas to provoke the SMO, blowing up Nord Stream in a secret operation (Sy Hersh), and, most recently, providing missile systems and NATO personnel to attack deep into pre-2015 Russia. To justify these ‘past’ Western actions and maintain ‘present’ support of Ukraine, Russia must be unilaterally smeared as the aggressor with ‘stock phrases’ that dominate MSM like: “Experts have also said that the seabed cases fit a pattern of Russian aggression.” Which experts? ‘Experts say’ (or ‘some say’) is a standard smear technique that requires no justification or source. So why all this effort with a non-denial denial to paint Russia as aggressive? As Guy Mettan points out: “If NATO were to be viewed as aggressive, rather than Russia, the entire construction of the myth would collapse. [and support for the Ukraine war] … This is why the media and research institutes …always drink at the same sources, always interview the same persons, always quote the same experts, tirelessly repeat the same refrain: Putin is a villain, Russia wants to invade us.” (“Creating Russophobia”). So my suggestion is that people add the three authors “Greg Miller, Robyn Dixon, Isaac Stanley-Becker” to their “Journalists to Distrust” list of MSM pseudo-journalists who are willing to compromise their integrity for a pay check. Greg Miller was already on my list for his contribution to an absurd WaPo article blaming Nord Stream on Ukrainians saboteurs on a yacht – another evidence-free propaganda story.
Well said, sir!