The Daily Populous Thursday December 26th, 2024 evening edition
Authored by ukdefencejournal.org.uk and submitted by Nordic-Bear

An investigation is underway into the disruption of the EstLink 2 power transmission cable, which connects Finland and Estonia.

The outage, which occurred on Christmas Day, has raised concerns about the potential causes, with authorities considering the possibility of vandalism or sabotage.

The disruption took place at 12:26 p.m. on 25 December, when the cable was transmitting 650 MW of power. Finnish transmission system operator Fingrid confirmed the loss of connection, but the exact cause of the outage remains unclear.

MarineTraffic, a service that tracks global shipping traffic, identified the Hong Kong-flagged container ship Xin Xin Tian 2 as being near the EstLink 2 cable at the time of the disruption. The ship had departed St. Petersburg on Christmas Eve and was en route to Port Said in Egypt. This vessel is reported to be a sister ship to the Newnew Polar Bear, a Chinese vessel that was involved in the damage of the Balticconnector gas pipeline in October 2023.

Fingrid is investigating whether the disruption occurred on land or was related to the submarine cable. At this stage, it is unclear whether the Xin Xin Tian 2 had any involvement in the power loss. Authorities continue to assess the situation to determine the cause of the outage.

The EstLink 2 cable is a vital part of the power grid between Finland and Estonia, and any disruption to its operation is being treated with high priority. However, no conclusive evidence has been presented regarding the cause of the outage, and the investigation is ongoing.

Gimme_Your_Wallet on December 26th, 2024 at 13:36 UTC »

Raising the cost of doing business against Russia. It's one of their ways to conduct hybrid warfare. "You can keep your sanctions for a while, but we will make it progressively unbearable for all of you."

Tammer_Stern on December 26th, 2024 at 10:55 UTC »

I feel that this is part of a strategy by Russia to weaken democracy and weaken western countries. Russian strategy here is wide ranging and includes tactics such as:

post social media showing eg a brown skinned unknown individual snooping round houses at night in your local facebook group. post inflammatory topics online and in newspapers eg immigrant crime rates showing higher rates than the uk for some, (while ignoring other nationalities with very low crime rates). fund politicians who specialise in divisive messages and propaganda. In the uk, this would be someone like Farage. edit : I feel cutting undersea cables does things like removes internet from a country, raising unhappy feelings in that country.

The net effect of this influence raises negative feelings, anti government sentiment, and raises the chance of riots and support for extreme political parties. It is literally like a game of civilization where your city has not enough housing or amenities and the people are “unhappy” and likely to riot.

Golda_M on December 26th, 2024 at 10:17 UTC »

I'm assuming Russia. Hard to say what the "strategy" is, because the motivation is not necessarily highly strategic.

First could be a sentimental, hawkish-political reasoning that Russia must respond to sanctions, anti-Russia policies. You could make a national pride case. Strategically, you could say this is related to "deference."

Deterrence is technically "strategic" but irl tends to be pretty weakly strategic. That said, strategic logic here is meaningful. Russia's enemies have gone after Russian interests with relative impunity. A whole new level of long-term sanction regime.

Also direct and indirect support for Ukrainian "deep interior" ops targeting Russian energy infrastructure and geopolitical interests in Syria, West Africa & whatnot. It's true that Russia went after Ukrainian infrastructure first and hardest... but...

That doesn't matter. Russia's not thinking "we deserve that one. It's measured. No foul." Russia are prosecuting a conflict. They are thinking "Europeans are feeling way to safe while acting against Russia."

I think it also might be true that Europe's appetite for anti-Russia activity depends on "no consequences" at home. If there is a real danger of significantly disruptive sabotage... Europe might back down. They'll be more motivated to negotiate an end to sanctions, a Russia-friendly end to the war, etc.

As things stand, Europeans^ might want to keep the sanctions and other pressures on Russia even if the Ukrain war ends. The only thing Europe needs from Russia is energy, and dependence on Russian energy is the most unpopular part of euro-russian trade.

The old western imperative to "promote/protect the international trade system" is gone. They have no problem excluding Russia from the trade system permanently. Russia might be looking to create leverage.

^America is less vulnerable and more scary.