Accidents, not Russian sabotage, behind undersea cable damage, officials say

[reACTIONary]

Source: WaPo, No Paywall, May Need Registration

An emerging consensus among U.S. and European security services holds that accidents were the cause of damage to Baltic seabed energy and communications lines.

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.

Read more: https://wapo.st/3Wtuf5t

[Shellback Squid]

1. I don't believe it, it was the russians

[Dave Bowman]

3. Absolutely. And WaPo is a shitty news source.

[reACTIONary]

6. First, They are reporting on ....

.... the assessment provided by several intelligence agencies, including our own. That would be reporting, not supporting. As far as supporting goes, they provide several contrary assessments, including several based on the fact that the anchor was being dragged for hundreds of miles.

I don't know if your opinion about WaPo is based on this article, or of you bothered to read it. Maybe you would let us know exactly how this article represents "shitty reporting".

[Dave Bowman]

11. Wapo is a shitty news source, period.

[reACTIONary]

13. Okey Dokey ....

..... period

[lapfog_1]

45. they have the satellite tracking of one of the ships that cut the electrical line going to Finland

a track that shows the ship leaving Russia... dragging anchor over the cable area... then BACKTRACKING and dragging the anchor over the same area a second time.

Hard for this to be an accident.

Also, these ships have been turning off their location transponders while doing this.

All reported multiple times from dozens of news sources.

Either this is Russian disinformation being promulgated by WaPo OR the EU intelligence agencies are trying to plant their own false stories for some reason... hoping we forget the other intelligence that they released.

Not to mention that the cable breaks are coming in droves now... 1 story every month.

Not to mention the Russian warship that parked over a main trans Atlantic cable near iceland just as the invasion of Ukraine started 3 years ago. It didn't do anything because it was discovered, but I think they planned to cut the cable to reduce data going to the USA from EU and Ukraine. It is very hard to explain why the Russian warship was parked in that particular spot in a vast ocean.

Maritime accidents my ass.

[reACTIONary]

46. Backtracking is certainly a suspicious maneuver....

... but I did a quick survey and could find no mention of it in any other reporting. Where did you read about that? Can you provide a source?

It is true that the "shadow fleet" of ships that transport sanctioned Russian oil - such as this one, the Eagle S - regularly turn off their transponders to avoid being tracked. Sometime they do so in order to meet up with another tanker mid-ocean and transfer oil from one ship to another.

There is satellite tracking, independent of the transponders, but it is spotty, because the satellites fly over quickly - there isn't 100% coverage making it hard to track a moving object. I know about some of this because I work for an organization that is developing satellite ship tracking software that can be used to spot suspicious behavior even with incomplete satellite coverage.

With the exception of the backtracking, all of this is typical of sanction evasion and is carried out regularly by the "shadow fleet". But even the backtracking might be part of an sanctions evasion strategy. In any case, I can't find a source for the backtracking - let me know where you learned of that.

[paleotn]

23. And you know this how?

After tomorrow, I may take what our intel services say with a measure of salt, but the Europeans have little reason to lie.

A wise person once taught me early in my career, don't marry your preconceived notions. Support them if need be but be ready to drop them or at least put them in the maybe category when evidence is found to the contrary.

[Calista241]

2. No chance it was an accident. That ship dragged its anchor for miles and miles.

That is not easy to do, and it doesn't happen by accident.

[reACTIONary]

7. That, along with several other facts and assessments...

... are reported in the article. But both our own intelligence agency, and other allied agencies, have come to a different assessment. I'm inclined to believe they have come to the correct conclusion.

[PJMcK]

4. Cover story

It’s transparently false. If a ship dragged its anchor severing an undersea cable, there would be time-confirming evidence.

Fortunately for the governments know that the people are stupid and will docilely accept the BS story.

[reACTIONary]

9. Why would "the governments" want ....

... their "stupid and docile" citizens to accept this "BS"? What nefarious and sinister purpose does it serve? And why would they all be in on it?

Inquiring minds want to know.

[PJMcK]

14. Consider this

If a Russian or Chinese ship purposefully severed the cables, that could be considered an act of war. Do the various governments involved really want an escalation between those nations? Do they want to conceal or reveal spy craft? Do they want to alarm their peoples?

Shipping, both commercial and military, is regulated and tracked almost as closely as aircraft. In addition to the Automatic Information System transponders required on almost all the vessels we’re talking about, there is more information from GPS, radar and more. Accordingly, it would be possible to determine which ships were in the vicinity at the time the cable was severed. The maritime authorities know more than they’ve released.

We’re both skeptical just from different angles, I guess.

[reACTIONary]

20. Thanks for your reply! In my own opinion....

Last edited Sun Jan 19, 2025, 02:21 PM - Edit history (1)

... if there was a deliberate attempt to white wash Russian involvement, they would have made an official declaration, rather than leave it to leaks. To the contrary, the current administration and probably the other foreign services seem to have an interest in creating suspicion and fear of Russia in order to motivate and continue support for Ukraine. A reasonable strategy under those conditions would be to not make ANY disclosures, leaving the suspicion intact while not having to risk a major escalation. Under those circumstances, a leak would be the only way for those who are more inclined to be informative to get the news out.

White washing is also incompatible with other disclosures of Russian attempts at sabotage, right up to attempts to plant bombs on civilian aircraft. Bombing a civilian aircraft is pretty close to an act of war, I would think.

There was also the case of the bombing of the gas pipeline. Ultimately it was determined that this was not done by Russia (which never made sense to me) but by Ukraine - or Ukraine state-sponsored actors. The results of this investigation were frankly disclosed, even though that conclusion would not be supportive of continued support for Ukraine - presumably support for Ukraine being in the interest of those who made the disclosure.

One other consideration.... International shipping is not well regulated or controlled. In the article you will note that the ship responsible for the incident is part of the "shadow fleet" and was surreptitiously carrying Russian oil. It is also noted that the several countries involved have started a program of advanced surveillance since these incidents occurred, which would indicate that no such surveillance was in place previously.

[dalton99a]

5. Yeah, right

[CentralMass]

8. That sounds like a bigger pile of crap than a tRump diaper load.

[SheltieLover]

32. See #29 for article links which would refute this bs

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=3376177

[BadgerKid]

10. Why would cables be laid where "maritime accidents" could occur?

Story doesn't pass the smell test.

[Igel]

16. If they cross the entirety of a body of water used for maritime trade,

it's inevitable.

[reACTIONary]

18. Because there isn't any other place...

... to lay them.

[paleotn]

24. ???

Because the shortest distance from point A to point B crosses busy shipping lines perhaps? Or would you rather pay multiple times more to lay a cable because....you know....boats. That's not how the undersea cable business works.

[RazorbackExpat]

12. I have a hard time believing that

In fact. I've had a hard time believing official narratives since 11/23/63

[riversedge]

15. Finland and others are not buying this............

..............The emerging view among Western spy agencies that accidents — and not Russia — are likely to blame for the undersea damage was dismissed by some critics of Russia.

Pekka Toveri, who represents Finland in the European Parliament and previously served as the country’s top military intelligence official, said that the seabed cases are part of “a typical hybrid operation” from Moscow.

“The most important thing in any hybrid operation is deniability,” Toveri said. Russia’s security services may have succeeded in not leaving “any proof that would hold up in court,” he said, but to conclude that they were accidents “is total B.S.”

Toveri and others cited anomalies in the behavior of the vessels involved as well as evidence that Russia has for decades devoted extensive resources — including a dedicated military unit known as the General Staff Main Directorate for Deep Sea Research — to mapping Western seabed infrastructure and identifying its vulnerabilities.

At least two of the ships suspected of causing damage appear to have dragged their anchors 100 miles or more across seafloor. A ship that dropped an anchor by accident, Toveri said, would immediately be dragged so noticeably off course that crews would scramble to bring the vessel to a stop and assess the damage.

.............................................

[reACTIONary]

19. Thanks! It seems from this excerpt....

.... that WaPo is presenting all sides of the story in their reporting. Imagine that! Hard to explain.

[SheltieLover]

29. Precisely! And would not explain NATO prepping

For war with ruskies!

I've posted a few related articles in GD:

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100219917372

French plane targeted by ruskies.


https://www.democraticunderground.com/100219917399

Wreckage of two Russian drones found in Romania after night attack on Ukraine


https://www.democraticunderground.com/100219917237

Hundreds of Swedish forces arrive in Latvia in largest deployment with NATO to date


I do not believe this WAPO bs. I believe they are trying to make pootin lo9k innocent.

[Marthe48]

17. Yep, sure is

Do I need sarcasm?

[dobleremolque]

21. Bull. No names making these assertions. No attribution. It's all "sources." n/t

[reACTIONary]

22. Yow! You mean that WaPo....

.... decided, for some nefarious reason, to just make this up out of nothing? And attribute it, not only to multiple sources, but to multiple nations! Wow!

I bet Jeff Bozo called up Greg Miller, Robyn Dixon and Isaac Stanley-Becker and told them he wanted "sources" on this ASAP! The bastards!

Then again, without anonymous sources willing to put their carriers at risk, and intrepid journalists willing to sit in a jail cell when subpoenaed, we wouldn't really know anything about what is going on.

[Gymbo]

25. No disrespect for your opinion

Anchors used on oil transport vessels can weigh more than 20 tons and no Western maritime officer would be caught dead dragging a twenty-ton anchor for 100 miles. Even Eastern European, or Russian crews would be ashamed to be found making a mistake like that, and the effect of dragging something that heavy would have pronounced consequences on the forward travel of that ship.
The same applies to smaller ships. A one thousand-pound anchor suddenly grabbing a submerged object would stop that ship with a very violent force. Ships at sea do not just take off with the anchor dragging, it is perhaps one of the first protocols for ship handling to order the anchor raised.

[paleotn]

28. Bad seamanship is more common than you think.

And bad airmanship. I've heard ATC recordings where it was so bad you'd want to ban some foreign carriers from our airspace forever. Yet they still fly into JFK, O'Hare and others, much to ATC's annoyance.

Think I'll hold on convinced until the evidence supports it. Intentional? Possibly, maybe even likely, but some here act like they were on scene watching it happen. They weren't.

[paleotn]

30. Yet, you automatically believe unattributed sources who agree with your views on things.

No worries. That's actually quite common.

[paleotn]

26. Reminds me of the "Call before you dig" adverts in the yellow pages back in the day.

Yet contractors still routinely dig up and snap communications cables due to ignorance and ineptitude. Not uncommon for undersea cables either. Poor seamanship, fishing trawlers, this list goes on. These were suspicious, but if there's no direct evidence, there's no direct evidence. Guess time might tell.

[The Unmitigated Gall]

27. I'm no sea-captain,

but to my layman's eye, dragging a gigantic anchor for miles on a seabed known to be crisscrossed with many energy and comms lines seems anything but accidental.
Russia is at war with the West, on terms Putin feels he can get away with.

[paleotn]

31. Did we raise anchor? Yeah, yeah, it's raised......................oh shit!

With an average of about 200 cable faults a year, according to the International Cable Protection Committee, damage to undersea communications infrastructure is not uncommon. The majority are caused by ship anchors or fishing activity such as trawling, where heavy equipment is dragged across the seafloor.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/undersea-cables-are-cut-suspicion-falls-russian-chinese-vessels-rcna187105

[SheltieLover]

33. Lets not overlook who owns WAPO & where his loyalties lie

Certainly not with NATO!

Link to related articles which appear to refute this claim.



On edit: https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=3376177

[C0RI0LANUS]

34. Cutting Undersea Cables is No Accident But is Inexpensive Hybrid Warfare

China has been suspected of cutting several of Taiwan's underseas cables.





This tactic has been replicated by the Kremlin in their sabotage campaign against countries supporting Ukraine. The threat of Russian sabotage has raised NATO's counterintelligence threat level to the highest its been in years. An officer from Russia or Georgia was reportedly on board the Eagle S, a suspected cable cutting ship (pictured below). According to Lloyd's of London, the Eagle S was loaded with spying equipment.


Finnish coastguard with Eagle S shown in the background after suspected cable sabotage incident. (Photo: Finnish Coast Guard)

So far, no Taiwanese, Japanese, or EU commercial ship has been accused of cable-cutting.



The Seawise Giant Anchor is a 36-tons, 7m long, 4.45m across, and 1.13m thick. Dragging an anchor like this along the seabed is an inexpensive way to damage critical cables and pipes while claiming it was "accidental."

Sources:

https://www.taipeitimes.com/News/taiwan/archives/2025/01/05/2003829674

https://www.yahoo.com/news/chinese-ship-severs-undersea-cables-202527317.html

https://www.lloydslist.com/LL1151955/Russia-linked-cable-cutting-tanker-seized-by-Finland-was-loaded-with-spying-equipment

https://www.stripes.com/theaters/us/2024-07-10/nato-summit-russia-ukraine-war-stoltenberg-europe-14441736.html

[SheltieLover]

35. See #29 above for links to posts on articles seeming to refute WAPOs bs

Ty for the info.

I wish WAPO were not allowed as a source on DU.

It's clear where their loyalties lie.

[C0RI0LANUS]

36. Hi SheltieLover. Concur.

In the run-up to the 2003 invasion of Iraq, there were plenty of pro-war Republicans in the USIC and DOD who ignored allied intelligence that 1) there were no WMDs; 2) there was no Saddam Hussein-Al Qaida connection. I realized that my colleagues drank the GOP Kool-Aid thanks to the MSM and enablers like notorious polemicist Thomas Friedman.



I am sensing the same pattern here to sway the American audience against hostility towards Russia. A few weeks ago some Republicans is a saloon told me that the Russia connections to Trump were all lies, so WaPo seems to be focusing on convincing the unconvinced.

[SheltieLover]

37. Absolutely!

Ty for sharing.
.

[SheltieLover]

43. Thanks!

[reACTIONary]

41. Thanks for those links...

... FYI, they do not "refute WaPo BS" because the same information is provided in the article. WaPo is reporting the on the assessments from several sources within several nations' intelligence services, and has included countervailing assessments.

It is the duty of the free press in a democracy to do so.

[SheltieLover]

42. It is unclear to me why you are so defensive of the WAPO

Can you please explain?

It's clear WAPO is NOT interested in democracy, so why should we accept anything they have to say, especially about the ruskies and their murderous intent?

Thanks!

[reACTIONary]

44. I am a defender of all good, solid enterprise reporting....

... against those who denigrate the so called M$M and yet rely on our leading newspapers for so much of the reporting they read elsewhere. Most of the "alternative" or "aggregators" or whatever news sources don't actually do any original reporting. They copy and paste enterprise reporting from WaPo, NYT, etc.

The three reporters who brought us this story

--- Greg Miller,
--- Robyn Dixon, and
--- Isaac Stanley-Becker

Are actually risking imprisonment to do so... especially with the upcoming administration. And Robyn Dixon, who is the Moscow bureau chief, risks being picked up at any time as a hostage for Putin just for being a journalist. But she put her name on the reporting.

It's not just the reporters who are at risk, it is also the anonymous sources they cultivate and are willing to put their careers at risk, if not jail, by leaking. And again, with the upcoming administration, this is going to be an even greater possibility, and we will need them more than ever.

The links above are to the reporters bios. Take a minute to read about who they are, what they have accomplished, and what they have done in service to our country and and for the good of the world in general. Doing so, we might want to give them a word of thanks, perhaps silently just by reading what they have to tell us and giving it fair consideration.

[Buddyzbuddy]

38. Last year off the coast of California, an oil line sprung

Last edited Mon Jan 20, 2025, 01:12 AM - Edit history (1)

a leak spewing lots of oil. Turns out a ships anchor was the culprit. The investigative authorities were able to determine this because ship traffic is monitored and recorded. So, at the time of the accident they recorded a ship's passing and if I recall correctly, they matched evidence from the ships anchor to the sight. I will see if I can find a report to sight and update if and when it's possible.
I thought the report was from last year but it looks as though it was 2021. This is what I found reported on NPR. There are other articles that were written at the time. I hope it helps.

NATIONAL
Coast Guard says a ship's anchor dragged California oil pipeline that later leaked
UPDATED OCTOBER 17, 20219:51 PM ET
By

The Associated Press

[reACTIONary]

40. Thanks! It would be interesting to compare to these incidents.

[orangecrush]

39. Bullshit