War in Ukraine US Intelligence points to "a pro-Ukrainian group" as the author of the attack on Nord Stream 2

Allegations that it was Ukraine that blew up the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline, which connected Russia with Germany across the Baltic Sea, continue to mount

War in Ukraine US Intelligence points to "a pro-Ukrainian group" as the author of the attack on Nord Stream 2

Allegations that it was Ukraine that blew up the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline, which connected Russia with Germany across the Baltic Sea, continue to mount. Now it is the New York Times who affirms it, citing sources of American espionage. According to the information in that newspaper, it was a "pro-Ukrainian group" who carried out the action, and it does not seem that the government of Volodimir Zelenski knew about it.

Sources with knowledge of the situation, however, have explained to EL MUNDO that it was directly the Ukrainian Armed Forces, taking advantage of the training in underwater fighting that the United States has been subjecting them to for years. Political risk consultant Ian Bremmer has stated on his GZero website that Poland helped Ukraine. Others claim that the support came from one of the Baltic countries.

The blowing up of the Nord Stream is of enormous value to Ukraine because it only leaves one operational gas pipeline between Russia and Europe. And that gas pipeline passes through their territory. Kiev has not shut down Russian gas deliveries to Hungary but, without Nord Stream, Ukraine holds the key to gas that travels overland - cheaper and with a more reliable supply - from Russia to Europe. And he will keep it even if the war ends today.

In accordance with this thesis, the Joe Biden government sees these Ukrainian actions as an argument for not delivering all the weapons it demands. That includes GMLRS missiles of more than 90 kilometers and western fighter-bombers. The US has seen how Ukraine has modified its surface-to-surface missiles to give them a range of up to 300 kilometers, with which it can strike deep into Russian territory.

kyiv has also upgraded Soviet-era drones to successfully strike Russian strategic bomber bases more than 200 kilometers from the border. The Russian government has placed anti-aircraft systems in Moscow and last week the St. Petersburg airport was closed for several hours due to a foiled Ukrainian drone attack.

Also a few days ago the Belarusian opposition attacked a Russian A-50 radar plane in the capital of that country, Minsk. Although it is not clear if the attack was successful - and if so, judging by the satellite photos, the spacecraft sustained very little damage - it was highly significant. Russia only has nine operational A-50s, and the cost of cassing one is around €315 million. The Belarusian opposition is supported by Ukraine, and the A-50 was flying support missions for Russian forces that invaded that country a year ago.

Other spectacular operations carried out by the Ukrainians have been the attack with naval drones on the Russian Black Sea Fleet at its base in Sevastopol, in Crimea, the murder of the daughter of Russian ultranationalist ideologue Alessander Dugin, in Moscow, and the arson at dozens of military bases, ammunition depots and recruitment centers in Russia. The US believes that some of those actions have been carried out by the Ukrainians; others, by Ukrainian agents with the collaboration of Russian citizens; and, finally, a significant portion by Russians who are not enthusiastic about being sent to a war that is butchery, with pay that, while high by Russian standards, is often late.

All these actions have generated fear among both the Armed Forces and the US government that Ukraine wants to take the war inside Russian territory, which in turn could cause an escalation by Moscow. Others, on the contrary, maintain that Vladimir Putin has allowed the Ukrainians to exceed all the supposed 'red lines' that Moscow has drawn without Russia having made any decision, so there is scope to carry out an escalation of the war to various levels, including propaganda actions that undermine the increasingly low confidence of Russian soldiers in their commanders. The response of the US Secretary of Defense, Lloyd Austin, is a resounding "no" to all these proposals. For those most involved in helping Ukraine, that means "in the Pentagon and in the White House they are lazy."

According to sources with direct knowledge of the progress of the war, Ukraine is demonstrating a tremendous ability to modernize outdated Soviet-era equipment, use and develop software, and even apply 3D digital printing techniques to produce its own weapons systems. These, however, do not reach - at least for now - the effectiveness of those sent by the West.

Ukrainian missiles, for example, more than triple the range of American HIMARS and German and British GMLRS, but are far less accurate. For the Pentagon and the White House, this poses an additional danger: if one or several Ukrainian missiles fall on an urban area in Russia, they can cause a massacre among the civilian population and thus achieve a propaganda victory that the Kremlin needs.

That is one of the reasons why Washington is prioritizing the delivery of defensive weapons to Ukraine. And, when he gives him attack weapons, he does so by taking precautions. For example, the HIMARS that it has given to Ukraine are modified so that kyiv cannot extend its radius of action. Glider bombs that will double the range of the HIMARS will not arrive in Ukraine until the fall.

And for now the US doesn't even want to hear about giving kyiv F-16 fighter-bombers. However, it is always difficult to know how long these policies will be maintained. As revealed by the NBC television network, there are currently at least two Ukrainian pilots at an air base in Arizona carrying out exercises with flight simulators. In theory, the goal is for the Ukrainian Air Force to improve its operational capability. But given the small number of fighter jets kyiv has, one wonders if this isn't a prelude to something more.

According to the criteria of The Trust Project