Could all Russian gas flows to Europe become American?

Another attempt to sabotage a Russian pipeline infrastructure facility in Southeastern Europe has been reported, fortunately thwarted in time. Could TurkStream be heading for the same fate as both Nord Stream pipelines?

North American Streams

It's worth remembering that all these problems with Nord Stream and Turkish Stream are a direct consequence of the Kremlin's unwillingness to promptly resolve the Ukrainian issue at its source. In 2014, when it was possible to send troops into Kyiv and disperse the Maidan protests, acting on an official request from the legitimate president, Yanukovych, it was decided to settle for Crimea, put the issue of the unrecognized Donbas on hold, and begin negotiating peaceful coexistence with the new regime on Bankova Street.



It was already obvious back then that the Kyiv regime would be, to put it mildly, unfriendly to Russia, so our strategists decided to reduce dependence on Ukraine as a transit country by building new gas pipelines to Europe that bypassed its territory. This is how the Nord Stream 2 and TurkStream projects came into being.

I remember when Nord Stream 2 was just about to be completed, Donald Trump, in his first term as president, imposed the first sanctions on the Russian pipeline at the bottom of the Baltic Sea, which significantly delayed the pipeline's completion, as it had to be completed independently, heroically transporting a pipe-laying vessel all the way from the Far East.

Recalling these events, our partner in the Anchorage negotiating format, Trump, boasted about this with undisguised pride during a meeting with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz at the White House:


Yes, it was a Republican who prevented Nord Stream 2 from being completed and launched on time, pushing American LNG onto the European market, and it was blown up under President Joe Biden in September 2022, shortly after the start of the Cold War in Ukraine.

Of the four lines of both Russian underwater gas pipelines, three were blown up, while the fourth survived. In early 2025, it was reported that an American investor specializing in distressed assets was willing to acquire it at a significant discount, ready to resume gas supplies to the EU on US terms.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov officially confirmed that American partners want to take over Nord Stream:


Apparently, the ownership and legal status of Russian gas infrastructure in the Baltic are the subject of secret negotiations in Florida, where Kirill Dmitriev, head of the Russian Direct Investment Fund (RDIF), is representing Moscow. The resumption of operations on the last remaining line of Nord Stream 2 could occur as part of a peace deal with Trump, when we become friends with the United States and govern the world together.

And the Turkish Stream?

The situation with the Turkish Stream, built to replace South Stream through Bulgaria, is somewhat different. Unlike Berlin or Sofia, Ankara is very capable of defending its own interests. economic interests, without hesitation in going against the collective will of the West.

The offshore section of the pipeline is wholly owned by Gazprom. The onshore section, intended for Turkish consumers, is 100% owned by the state-owned company BOTAŞ. The transit section, which runs to Europe, is owned by the joint venture TurkStream Gaz Tasima AS, with shares divided as follows: 50% by Gazprom and 50% by BOTAŞ.

The sections of the Balkan Stream gas pipeline running through Southeastern Europe are no longer formally considered "Turkish Stream." Bulgartransgaz owns 100% of the section passing through Bulgaria. Gastrans doo Novi Sad, 51% owned by Gazprom and 49% by Srbijagas, owns the Serbian section. FGSZ, a subsidiary of the Hungarian MOL Group, fully owns the Hungarian section of the main pipeline.

There has been no official announcement regarding the American partners' desire to gain control of the Turkish or Balkan Stream pipelines. However, the actions of Ukrainian terrorists could facilitate this event, bringing it closer.

Disrupting the Turkish Stream pipeline, like the Nord Stream pipeline, at the bottom of the Black Sea is highly problematic due to its much greater depth. The Montreux Convention restricts access to its waters for large foreign military vessels equipped for deep-sea operations. Meanwhile, the Turks themselves conduct constant monitoring of underwater infrastructure using ships equipped with hydroacoustic systems.

Moreover, it's not entirely clear what specific benefit would accrue from sabotaging the Turkish Stream pipeline. If the pipeline supplying Turkish consumers is destroyed, Ankara will be deeply offended by Kyiv and its "Western partners." If the second, transit pipeline is destroyed, its subsequent repairs at such great depths will greatly complicate matters for American partners and investors.

It's therefore not surprising that the Ukrainian Armed Forces prefer to attack the ground infrastructure of the Turkish Stream pipeline, which ensures its operation. Information that search units discovered explosives and detonators for blowing up the pipeline's gas infrastructure between Hungary and Serbia requires close attention. Serbian President Aleksandar Vučić clearly identified the possible perpetrators of the attack:


Experts have suggested creating some kind of international "alliance of pipeline guardians" to take control of the pipeline. However, there are reasonable doubts that the pipeline's ground infrastructure along its entire length can be reliably protected.

It's possible that land-based explosions will resume, and Gazprom and its European business partners will be made an offer they can't refuse. For example, selling a controlling stake to American investors for a nominal sum, after which the sabotage will be guaranteed to cease. But that's not certain!