The first analyses, especially in Italy, all pointed against Moscow. “Because Russia could be behind the sabotage of the gas pipelines,” he wrote Ants. “It is hard to imagine that this was a coincidence,” said Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen. Joseph BorrellHigh Representative of the EU, spoke of a “deliberate act” that could not be “a coincidence”. And also Charles Michael denounced “the attempt to further destabilize the EU’s energy supply”. The underlying idea was that Putin, while damaging an infrastructure owned by Gazprom (the cost of repairs was estimated at half a billion euros), wanted to put pressure on European countries by reducing the gas supply which in those months was already difficult and at reckless costs. The Italian newspapers were almost sure of it, so much so that they relaunched in the headlines relaunching the Ukrainian accusation of a “Russian terrorist attack”.
Too bad that in reality behind the “deliberate act” to “destabilize” Europe there were apparently Ukrainian citizens. The German prosecutors followed the traces left on the Andromeda, analyzed the passage of a Ukrainian car in Rugen, checked the false names, the cell phones registered all together on the Baltic Sea coast, searched for a diving school in Kiev and finally connected the names with the DNA traces left on the yacht. After all, six months after the explosion, first the Washington Post and then the New York Times they had absolved Moscow of any responsibility and pointed the finger at pro-Kiev groups. At the same time also exonerating the CIA which, to make matters worse, had been accused of having sent Navy divers to strike Russian infrastructure.