Rogov claimed that the cause of the explosion is unknown but that unspecified actors inspected the gas tank on June 17

[GoldfishLord]

Russian sources claimed that a car carrying a Zaporizhia Oblast occupation official exploded in Simferopol, occupied Crimea on June 18. Zaporizhia Oblast occupation official Vladimir Rogov claimed that the gas tank of the assistant to the Zaporizhia Oblast occupation deputy prime minister, Vladimir Epifanov, exploded, injuring Epifanov and two other passengers.[43] Rogov claimed that the cause of the explosion is unknown but that unspecified actors inspected the gas tank on June 17, implying possible sabotage.

Source: https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-june-19-2023

---

Exactly which part implies possible sabotage?
Does the "the cause of the explosion is unknown but that unspecified actors inspected the gas tank on June 17" part implies it or does the "unspecified actors inspected the gas tank on June 17" part implies it?

 

[Tarheel]

The answer is it's everything leading up to that, especially the last part. He doesn't know what the cause was, but the actions of those unknown individuals is considered suspicious.

**imply

 

[GoldfishLord]

OK. The "that the cause of the explosion is unknown but that unspecified actors inspected the gas tank on June 17" part implies possible sabotage.

 

[jutfrank]

This part:

unspecified actors inspected the gas tank on June 17

 

[Rover_KE]

The word 'actors' should be changed. It makes me wonder if it was Hugh Grant, Brad Pitt, Kate Winslet or Tom Hanks who had been doing the inspections.

 

[GoldfishLord]

Is the "of" in "the gas tank of the assistant" natural and idiomatic?

 

[Rover_KE]

Yes—especially as it's followed by '... to the Zaporizhia Oblast occupation deputy prime minister, Vladimir Epifanov,

 

[Tarheel]

@GoldfishLord I would have made it clear that it was his car's gas tank (if that's what it was).