Not really, Ukraine can kick this can down the road for a decade. There is no political will in Germany, never mind anywhere else in Europe, to hold Ukraine (or the US) accountable for the blowing up of Nord Stream. Ultimately, Russia invaded and thats the only thing that matters to most of the political elite in Europe. Anything like Nuance, Context, Double Standards, Provocation, Russia's security Interests and What Not, is simply not convenient / not relevant.
That's a VERY loaded framing of the situation. Everyone in Germany is well aware of the severe implications if hard evidence for a connection between the suspect's actions and the Ukrainian government can be established. Which is all the more reason to apply a high standard of proof. In any case, authorities will definitely slow-walk this investigation until at least this spring, when very dicey state elections take place in three Eastern German states where a larger share of the population is sympathetic to the Russian perspective on this conflict.
One more thing, though:
Quote
German prosecutors allege that Sergey K., a former officer in the Ukrainian army, acted on behalf of the Ukrainian government in planning the attack. The stated objective was to permanently halt Russian gas supplies to Europe and deprive Russia of both revenue and political leverage over the continent.
That's actually not true. The working theory of the prosecution, until proven otherwise, is that Sergey K. and his group were rogue actors who struck without official permission or order by any Ukrainian authorities. Ruling out at least a direct order from the Ukrainian
government seems reasonable. Hypothetically, say the order came from Zelensky himself - then there surely won't be a written letter signed with the presidential seal telling the guys "Nord Stream must be blown up, but don't tell Ze Germans".
So what needs to be investigated is if there were any inofficial orders or permissions coming from Ukrainian authorities, or if Sergey K. and his team really acted out of their own volition as some sort of "concerned Ukrainian citizens". Considering the strong militia culture in pre-war Ukraine (Azov etc.), I wouldn't fully rule this out either. Personally, I think the most likely explanation is that the order to Sergey K. came from some mid-level, hardline colonel or general, or from a high-ranking intelligence officer, who acted without permission or even consultation with their superiors.
Imho, it is this level of the hierarchy which seems concerned mostly with creating a fait accompli on the ground, whereas high-ranking politicians should have been more keenly aware of the heavy diplomatic and political risks of such a sabotage against an ally. Keep in mind that the whole rationale behind the NS2 attack was concern over Germany turning on them, so based on this same rationale, blowing up German infrastructure would have been a hugely risky move.