The Europeans fail China’s pipeline attack test
Tom Rogan
In early October, the undersea Balticconnector gas pipeline between Estonia and Finland was damaged. Two undersea telecommunications cables linking Estonia to Finland and Sweden were also damaged.
What happened?
CHINA’S INFERNAL INTERNAL AFFAIRS HYPOCRISY
Since mid-October, suspicion has fallen on a Chinese-flagged vessel the Newnew Polar Bear. The ship is believed to have deliberately dragged its anchor through the path of the cables, thus destroying them. That anchor was found a few meters from the damaged cables. On Thursday, we got an update. In an interview with Politico, Finland’s minister for Europe stated that the evidence suggests the incident was “intentional.” He added that it is unlikely the act occurred without Beijing’s approval.
This is not exactly a Sherlock Holmes-level deduction. The reality, as the minister and everyone else with any knowledge of the Chinese system understands, is that this activity required two things: China’s approval and the ship crew’s willful intent.
The Chinese Communist Party doesn’t exactly lend itself to easy forgiveness for transgressions. And certainly not political transgressions. But a political transgression is exactly what the Newnew Polar Bear would have committed if it destroyed these cables without Beijing’s approval. Doing so, after all, would have meant the ship’s crew risking severe damage to Beijing’s relations with the European Union. Moreover, it is incomprehensible to think that a crew of a ship this large, with all its warning and indicator systems, would be unaware that its anchor was dragging the seafloor for nearly 200 kilometers. Top line: The Chinese government is very likely responsible for this action.
For a start, the nation most affected, Estonia, is a top target of China’s ire. Beijing is furious at Estonia’s 2022 departure from a pro-Beijing dialogue group. It is also incensed that Estonia has offered Taiwan the opportunity to establish a representative office on its soil. The semi-deniable means of this attack gives Beijing a way to punish Estonia and intimidate Europe. It also allows Beijing to test the European Union’s willingness to respond to hybrid attacks such as this one. Finally, it allows Beijing to show solidarity with Russia.
Some might suggest that the Russians could have recruited the Newnew Polar Bear to carry out this attack. That’s highly unlikely. Yes, the Russians have a direct interest in undermining Estonia and Finland. Vladimir Putin seeks Estonia’s subjugation in service of a new Russian imperialism. The Kremlin also despises the Finns for joining NATO in the aftermath of the invasion of Ukraine. Still, Putin would not risk aggravating Beijing by using one of its ships to destroy European pipelines. Putin views China as his principal partner, even showing Xi Jinping a public deference that is otherwise anathema to the Russian political psyche.
None of this is rocket science. In turn, that Europe’s response to this outrage has begun and ended with quiet requests for Beijing’s assistance is sadly telling. Illustrating Beijing’s confidence that the Europeans will let this slide, the requests appear to have fallen on deaf ears. Quite how this comports with the EU’s much-vaunted plans to take a more robust stance with China on topics such as supply chain protection and countercoercion tools is unclear.
What the European Union should have done is to seize the Newnew Polar Bear and hold its crew for interrogation. While the ship is now too close to China to take action, its culpability has been suspected since at least mid-October. It could have been boarded many weeks ago. Yes, the Chinese would have gone rhetorically berserk at such a boarding, but Xi currently needs Europe’s favor more than it needs him. The centerpiece of his long-term strategy for global hegemony is to dissect the trans-Atlantic alliance structure. That won’t happen if China overreacts against Europe with punitive economic or diplomatic strategies. Had the EU seized this vessel, Beijing would likely have demanded the crew’s release and simultaneously distanced itself from the incidents in question. Instead, Beijing has learned that Europe will timidly tolerate direct physical attacks on its interests.
There is at least one ray of light here: The U.S. has new evidence to bolster its claim — and repudiate French President Emmanuel Macron’s associated disagreement — that China’s threats require organized NATO attention.