PRO-UKRAINIAN GROUP SABOTAGED NORD STREAM PIPELINES

[Wunder-Zeichen]

Intelligence Suggests Pro-Ukrainian Group Sabotaged Pipelines, U.S. Officials Say

New intelligence reporting amounts to the first significant known lead about who was responsible for the attack on the Nord Stream pipelines that carried natural gas from Russia to Europe.

NY Times: New intelligence reviewed by U.S. officials suggests that a pro-Ukrainian group carried out the attack on the Nord Stream pipelines last year, a step toward determining responsibility for an act of sabotage that has confounded investigators on both sides of the Atlantic for months. The brazen attack on the natural gas pipelines, which link Russia to Western Europe, fueled public speculation about who was to blame, from Moscow to Kyiv and London to Washington, and it has remained one of the most consequential unsolved mysteries of Russia’s year-old war in Ukraine. Ukraine and its allies have been seen by some officials as having the most logical potential motive to attack the pipelines. They have opposed the project for years, calling it a national security threat because it would allow Russia to sell gas more easily to Europe. Ukrainian government and military intelligence officials say they had no role in the attack and do not know who carried it out. U.S. officials said there was much they did not know about the perpetrators and their affiliations. The review of newly collected intelligence suggests they were opponents of President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia, but does not specify the members of the group, or who directed or paid for the operation. Some initial U.S. and European speculation centered on possible Russian culpability, especially given its prowess in undersea operations, though it is unclear what motivation the Kremlin would have in sabotaging the pipelines given that they have been an important source of revenue and a means for Moscow to exert influence over Europe. One estimate put the cost of repairing the pipelines starting at about $500 million. U.S. officials say they have not found any evidence of involvement by the Russian government in the attack. Nord Stream 1 and Nord Stream 2, as the two pipelines are known, stretch 760 miles from the northwest coast of Russia to Lubmin in northeast Germany. The first cost more than $12 billion to build and was completed in 2011. The pipelines were ripped apart by deep sea explosions in September, in what U.S. officials described at the time as an act of sabotage.

Now comes the most significant part of the Nord Stream story:

Any suggestion of Ukrainian involvement, whether direct or indirect, could upset the delicate relationship between Ukraine and Germany, souring support among a German public that has swallowed high energy prices in the name of solidarity. Last month, the investigative journalist Seymour Hersh published an article on the newsletter platform Substack concluding that the United States carried out the operation at the direction of Mr. Biden. In making his case, Mr. Hersh cited the president’s preinvasion threat to “bring an end” to Nord Stream 2, and similar statements by other senior U.S. officials.

[lei.talk]

seymour-hersh.substack/how-america-took-out-the-nord-stream

[Wunder-Zeichen]

Ukraine and its allies have been seen by some officials as having the most logical potential motive to attack the pipelines. They have opposed the project for years, calling it a national security threat because it would allow Russia to sell gas more easily to Europe. Ukrainian government and military intelligence officials say they had no role in the attack and do not know who carried it out. U.S. officials said there was much they did not know about the perpetrators and their affiliations. The review of newly collected intelligence suggests they were opponents of President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia, but does not specify the members of the group, or who directed or paid for the operation.

In other words: We know it was a pro-Ukrainian group, but beyond that we don't know much else.

So much for U.S. intelligence.

We need to connect the dots.

[VIK LEWA]

Germany and Nord Stream Sabotage: Victim or Confidant?
The "Energiewende" as a reason for German disinterest?

Exploring the complex geopolitical position that Germany finds itself in amid the Nord Stream sabotage.

Geopoliticalmonitor: The Nord Stream project can be traced back to Social Democratic Chancellor Gerhard Schröder, who attended the signing a letter of intent with Vladimir Putin just days before the 2005 federal election. His successor, Angela Merkel, continued the project. Her term in office also saw the start of construction of Nord Stream 2. Proponents from the SPD and CDU/CSU understood Nord Stream 1 and later Nord Stream 2 as a private-sector project, a means to supply Germany with cheap energy, a way to replace coal, a bridge to Russia and, above all, a sovereign German and European decision. Moreover, there was a suspicion that the threats from the U.S. against Nord Stream 2 were self-interested in order to sell U.S. LNG gas to Europe.

:

But, of course, all of this does not and cannot mean that Germany carried out the sabotage and criminal activity.

Words matter, and let's not forget that Joe Biden threatened to shut it down and declared the pipeline "history" if Russia were to cross the Ukrainian border again with its troops. It sure looks like he did, and it sure looks like the United States made good on those threats. Look at the intent. Intent matters.

[gixajo]

It seems quite obvious that the typical "quid prodest" in this case would point in the first place to the USA, but apart from that there is no indication that it was them.

Of course something like this would only be within the reach of doing so discreetly someone who has the resources of a state with good navy/army, not a simple group of saboteurs, but the resources, means, information, etc. to do what was done the way it was done are available to many of the countries that have a coast on the Baltic Sea, including Russia.

Anyway, we don´t know who sabotaged the Nord Stream, but all we should already know who started a war in Europe invading its neighbouring country with absurd excuses of de-nazification, blaming the invaded country for his invasion.

[VIK LEWA]

CGTN: Does the sabotage of Nord Stream pipelines violate international law?

State actor still main suspect behind Nord Stream sabotage, says investigator
Russian navy ship photographed near Nord Stream pipelines before blasts
Russian ‘Special Vessel’ Spotted Before Nord Stream Blasts – Danish Media
Russian ship spotted near Nord Stream pipelines days before sabotage: Reports
Perpetrator of Nord Stream sabotage unknown: Swedish prosecutor
Top US official hails Nord Stream 2 blast
Top US official hails Nord Stream 2 blast
US and Norway blew up the Nord Stream Pipelines: Seymour Hersh
GT Exclusive: Current Ukraine war bound to end badly for US as veteran American journalist reveals Biden culpability in destruction of Nord Stream pipeline
KRAYDEN: Famous journalist Hersh says Biden 'screwed up' when he destroyed Nord Stream pipelines
Why the German media deny US responsibility for the destruction of Nord Stream
S.Hrg. 117-254 — UPDATE ON U.S.-RUSSIA POLICY
S/PV.9266 Security Council

Seven months after the bombing of Nord Stream 1 and 2 pipelines in the Baltic Sea waters, the mystery of who targeted the pipelines remains unsolved. In September 2022, a series of deep-sea explosions damaged three out of four underwater pipelines of the Nord Stream project designed to carry Russian gas directly to Western Europe. Several countries were said at the time to have motives for the Nord Stream pipeline sabotage: Russia, Germany, Ukraine, Poland, Britain and the United States. German prosecutors said earlier that in January investigators searched a ship suspected of having transported explosives used in the blasts. The New York Times has reported that U.S. officials had seen new intelligence indicating that a "pro-Ukrainian group" was responsible for the sabotage. The Ukrainian government denied involvement in the action, while the Kremlin rejected the Times report as a "diversion." A series of clandestine bombings and subsequent underwater gas leaks occurred on the Nord Stream 1 and Nord Stream 2 natural gas pipelines on September 26, 2022. Both pipelines were built to pump Russian gas from Russia to Germany through the Baltic Sea. The bulk of the infrastructure is owned by the Russian state-owned gas company, Gazprom. Following the sabotage, Russia rained down accusations on various Western actors, including the U.K. Moscow has consistently denied involvement and denounced the incident as a "terrorist attack." Nord Stream 2 was to be a route for the delivery of natural gas from Russia directly to Germany. Berlin suspended certification of the pipeline following Moscow's recognition of the Donetsk and Lugansk People's Republics in February.

Seymour Hersh, an investigative journalist, is, on the other hand, highly sceptical of a new narrative suggesting that a pro-Ukrainian group was responsible for blowing up the Nord Stream pipelines. Hersh says Biden 'screwed up' when he destroyed Nord Stream pipelines, and he believes that the United States blew up the Nord Stream pipelines that brought liquid natural gas from Russia to Germany in order to keep its European allies on side against Russia. "This war", he explicitly and emphatically declares, "is not going to end well for the Ukrainians and the Biden administration. The American public is not being told the whole story by the media. It's just not going to end well. Whether you agree or disagree with Putin, I don't agree with going to war. We made an agreement [with the Soviet Union] in 1990 when East and West Germany merged, to let that country stay in NATO, and we made an agreement in writing that we would not expand NATO one inch to the east. Now we've added 14 more countries to NATO. I can understand the provocation. I wish he hadn't started the war, but I will tell you, he's not going to lose the war." Russian Security Council Secretary Nikolay Patrushev also claimed that Moscow had obtained certain materials which point to a Western trace in organizing and executing the blasts. While nobody has claimed responsibility for the Nord Stream explosions, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken described the incident as a "tremendous opportunity," which would enable EU countries to become less dependent on Russian energy. Moscow officials have repeatedly said the US was the primary beneficiary of the blasts, with Kremlin Press Secretary Dmitry Peskov arguing last month that, by weaning itself of Russian energy, the EU would conveniently become "addicted" to American energy instead. Knowledge of US responsibility for the attack was widespread, Hersh told the Berliner Zeitung. "The people in America and Europe who build pipelines know what happened… The people who own companies that build pipelines know the story." He said he "didn't hear it from them," but he “quickly learned that they knew." One of the main accusations against Hersh was that he relied on a single source in the US security apparatus whose identity he is keeping secret for security reasons, whereas journalistic due diligence, notes the WSWS, requires at least two sources. In fact, one of Hersh's primary sources is the president's threat and Deputy Secretary of State Victoria Nuland, who made similar comments. After the attack, she exulted that she was pleased "Nord Stream 2 is now, as they say, a pile of junk at the bottom of the ocean."

How to define destroying another country's infrastructure?

Starting in Russia and landing in Lubmin, Germany, the Nord Stream pipelines are majority owned by Russia, along with German, Dutch and French stakeholders. They have long been a target of criticism by the U.S. and its allies, who are concerned that the infrastructure project increases Europe's dependence on Russian gas, which poses a risk to the continent's energy security. "Apart from specific state properties such as foreign embassies and consulates, there is no universal rule of requiring a country to provide protection for another country's state property under the international law," said Jiang Shengli, associate professor at the School of International Law under East China University of Political Science and Law. "However, it is recognized that even in the absence of particular rules in international treaties or customary international law, a country should at least take an obligation of passive inaction not to cause damage to another country's state property arbitrarily," said Jiang, who is also a director of the International Public Law Teaching and Research Office. As state property is an important material foundation for a country's domestic governance, arbitrary damage to another country's state property hinders its handling of internal or external affairs and poses risk of infringing on another country's sovereignty, according to Jiang. According to the draft articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts passed by the UN in 2001, "The responsible State is under an obligation to make full reparation for the injury caused by the internationally wrongful act" and must repatriate "Injury... any damage, whether material or moral, caused by the internationally wrongful act of a State." The draft is not a formally binding international legal document, but as a codification of customary international law in the field of state responsibility, it has been widely recognized by the international community, Jiang added.

An attempt to divert attention?

At a UN Security Council meeting in February, Russian ambassador Vassily Nebenzia said there was "proof that explosives had been planted" near the pipeline during a NATO exercise in the summer of 2022, citing the report by American investigative journalist Seymour Hersh alleging that the U.S. conducted a covert attack. However, U.S. Ambassador John Kelley said the meeting is a "blatant attempt" by Russia to distract from the impact of its invasion of Ukraine. "It should not be assumed that making the international community pay more attention to the blasts is intended to divert its attention from the Ukraine conflict, as they are independent and of different events," Jiang told CGTN, adding that the incident deserves the same level of attention from the international community. Currently, there is not enough clues to show what happened beneath the waters of the Baltic Sea, aside from a blurry photo of a 12-inch-long cylinder covered in algae on March 29 released by Denmark. The Danish authorities said the object might be an empty maritime smoke buoy. "In my personal opinion, although there is not yet sufficient evidence to prove that the Nord Stream pipeline was destroyed by the U.S., the possibility of its sabotage cannot be ruled out before an objective and fair investigation is conducted," said Jiang. The U.S. is one of the few countries in the world with deep-sea explosive capability that can destroy the pipelines. It also has a visible political and strategic intention, namely, to eliminate European countries' dependence on Russia's energy supply and compel them to firmly support sanctions against Russia, Jiang added. Given the high tensions between the U.S. and Russia and the even more complex consequences that arise once the truth is uncovered, it is unclear whether the incident will ultimately receive a fair investigation, he said.

[VIK LEWA]

It seems quite obvious that the typical "quid prodest" in this case would point in the first place to the USA, but apart from that there is no indication that it was them.

Of course something like this would only be within the reach of doing so discreetly someone who has the resources of a state with good navy/army, not a simple group of saboteurs, but the resources, means, information, etc. to do what was done the way it was done are available to many of the countries that have a coast on the Baltic Sea, including Russia.

Anyway, we don´t know who sabotaged the Nord Stream, but all we should already know who started a war in Europe invading its neighbouring country with absurd excuses of de-nazification, blaming the invaded country for his invasion.

Sure, if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear. The government delights in obfuscation and obstruction and intimidation and political intrigue, yet if they've done nothing wrong, they have nothing to hide, right? Of course, the government has something to hide and is attempting to avoid comeuppance and retribution. This really is a swipe at a wider sense of systemic obfuscation and denial. After all, if you've done nothing illegal, then there's nothing to hide.

As the Security Council Report points out, Russia had no obvious motive to carry out this act of terrorism on its own critical infrastructure, but, on the contrary, is likely to bear considerable expenses to repair the pipelines. Let's stop pussy-footing around the fact that three countries, namely Denmark, Germany and Sweden, have already carried out extensive investigations of the Nord Stream terrorism. Maybe most significantly, those countries presumably know much about the circumstances and underlying causes of the terrorist attack. Sweden in particular has perhaps the most to tell the world about the crime scene, which its divers investigated.

Yet instead of sharing that information and intelligence globally, they have kept the results of their investigations secret and confidential from the rest of the world and, perhaps more importantly, have kept their mouths shut out of fear for repurcussions and for fear of implications. Moreover, Sweden has refused to share its findings and deductions with Russia and has also turned down or turned away a joint investigation with Denmark and Germany.

So in the interest of global peace and security and stability and prosperity and progress, here is the deal: the Security Council should require or demand those countries to immediately turn over the results of their investigations and findings to the Council. No pussy-footing around, no politicking, no drama, no hoopla, just action.

But it looks like they have something to hide, and the assumption is they must have something to hide and reasons not to uncover or disclose the truth.

Fortunately, the truth is knowable and also nameable.

Hallelujah and Amen.

AMERICAN THREATS TO INTERNATIONAL
PEACE AND SECURITY

https://www.theapricity.com/forum/sh...=1#post7708375

"I'm soooo happy that Nord Stream 2 is now, as they say..."



https://imgflip.com/i/7k6wfp