Sabotage or accident? The cutting of critical undersea cables has led to a disagreement between American and European officials, sparking concerns of potential hybrid warfare and deliberate disruption of vital infrastructure.
European officials have been quick to point fingers at potential sabotage, suggesting that the simultaneous cutting of two undersea internet cables in the Baltic Sea could not have been mere coincidence. Boris Pistorius, the Defense Minister of Germany, expressed his doubts about the cables being accidentally severed, echoing the sentiments of other European leaders.
In a joint statement, the foreign ministers of Finland and Germany voiced their “serious concern” over the incident, hinting at the possibility of a hybrid warfare campaign potentially orchestrated by Russia. This suspicion is not unfounded, as there have been previous incidents of arson, explosions, and sabotage across European countries for which Moscow has been accused.
The timing of the cable disruptions aligns closely with warnings issued by the United States about potential Russian threats to critical undersea infrastructure. Reports of a Russian clandestine marine unit expanding its operations and suspicious vessel movements in European waters have only added fuel to the fire.
However, two US officials familiar with the initial assessment of the incident have stated to CNN that they do not believe the damage was a result of deliberate Russian activity or that of any other nation. Instead, they suggest that the most likely cause was an anchor drag from a passing vessel. While such incidents have occurred in the past, the rapid succession of the two cable cuts is still concerning.
The Kremlin has vehemently denied any involvement in the incident, calling the accusations “laughable” and baseless. Despite this, law enforcement agencies in Finland and Sweden remain convinced that the damage was intentional, prompting investigations into potential acts of sabotage.
One vessel, in particular, has caught the attention of authorities and online investigators in connection with the cable cuts. The Chinese-flagged ship Yi Peng 3 crossed both cables at the approximate times of the incidents, raising suspicions about its involvement. The vessel, which departed from a Russian port and had been moored for some time, is now anchored in international waters near Sweden and Denmark.
While the Yi Peng 3 has been identified as the most likely suspect by US and Western intelligence officials, no concrete evidence linking it to the sabotage has been found. Cinia, a Finnish telecom provider, revised its estimate of the cable cut’s location to match the vessel’s trajectory, adding to the suspicions.
The vessel is associated with Ningbo YiPeng Shipping Co Ltd. and Win Enterprise Ship Management, according to analyst Dimitris Ampatzidis. Historical trade data shows that the Yi Peng 3 has transported Russian coal multiple times, but it is not currently listed on any sanction lists.
As investigations and diplomatic tensions continue to mount, the incident raises questions about the vulnerability of undersea infrastructure and the potential for state-sponsored sabotage. The dispute between American and European officials underscores the challenges of attribution in the murky waters of cyber and maritime security threats. Only time will tell whether this incident was truly an accident or part of a larger, more sinister campaign.
