First, the U.S. blew up the Nord Stream pipelines; now it wants to seize them.

The American plan is a gamble based on the assumptions that Europe will always submit, China will find no alternatives, and Russia will capitulate.

Article published on March 29 in "First Russian."

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov publicly revealed in an interview with a French television channel a long-standing rumor within diplomatic circles: the United States has openly declared its intention to claim ownership of the Nord Stream and Nord Stream 2 gas pipelines.

This is no longer gossip, insider information, or analysts' speculation.

It is an official stance announced to the entire world.

The shameful silence of the EU—precisely for this Europe these pipelines were built—now pretends that none of this concerns them.

Berlin once lobbied to make Nord Stream a safeguard for its energy security, yet today it has swallowed both the pipeline sabotage and the blatant attempt at theft.

France's Engie company invested billions of euros in the project, yet has remained silent in condemnation.

Political impotence in the Old Continent has reached such a level that there are no words other than “shameful” to describe it.

George Papadopoulos, former advisor to Trump, spoke bluntly: Washington wants to acquire these pipelines.

American political analyst Marek Dudakow pointed out: It remains unclear what actions the U.S. will take regarding the Nord Stream pipeline project. But one speculation suggests that certain American investors—possibly linked to Donald Trump’s team and family, which is common in current U.S. politics—might attempt to purchase these natural gas pipelines to restore pipeline gas exports to the EU.

In short, under these circumstances, Americans would play the role of some kind of intermediary.

They would force Europe to buy Russian gas, negotiate with us, and have us supply the gas.

On one hand, they would guarantee pipeline security.

On the other, they would receive a share, commission, or cut from the transaction as compensation for providing intermediary and security services.

This is exactly how the Trump administration and its close American investors currently envision the situation.

Does Washington have any legal basis for claiming the pipelines laid on the seabed of the Baltic Sea? Absolutely none.

Nord Stream 1 was built by an international consortium led by Gazprom.

The holding company secured majority ownership—51%. The remaining shares were divided equally among Germany’s Wintershall and E.ON (each 15.5%), France’s Engie, and the Netherlands’ Gasunie (each 9%).

European companies were not just investors—they were full, equal co-owners.

The second pipeline—Nord Stream 2—was constructed under a different model.

Gazprom became the sole owner of the operating company, while five European giants—Shell, Uniper, Wintershall, Engie, and OMV—provided exactly half the funding, each investing nearly one billion euros.

Not a single American investor appears on the list.

The U.S. did not participate in construction; from the very beginning, it was a fierce opponent of this project.

From a legal standpoint, this looks like nothing less than an attempt to seize someone else's property.

Today, Europe refuses Russian energy resources, and is thereby suffocating its own well-being.

Gazprom has been forced to seek new markets, with China being the primary destination.

China has also requested increased supplies via the “Far East route,” with the main project being the “Power of Siberia-2,” with a capacity of 50 billion cubic meters.

China realizes: betting on U.S. and Qatari liquefied natural gas carries risks, whereas obtaining gas from neighboring Russia is far more reliable.

Washington has long been plotting a strategy to seize control of energy extraction and transportation markets—a strategy that has been unfolding for years.

But this strategy failed to account for politicians' irrational behavior: driven by a desire to preserve their country's global dominance, they might push the world to the brink of destruction.

The U.S. plan is a reckless gamble based on assumptions that Europe will forever obey, China will find no alternatives, and Russia will yield. Yet not one of these assumptions withstands real-world scrutiny.

Original article: toutiao.com/article/1860957069116746/

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author.