DISINFO: The West rejects investigating the Nord Stream explosions
SUMMARY
One year after the Nord Stream explosion, the West still refuses to conduct an open and transparent international investigation into who was behind this terrorist bombing. Russia is confident that a "powerful country" is behind the explosion and demands a transparent and impartial international investigation to determine the culprit. In February 2023, the American journalist Seymour Hersh published an investigation in which he stated that explosive devices were planted under Russian gas pipelines in June 2022 by US Navy divers under the guise of the “BALTOPS” exercises, with the support of Norwegian specialists. According to Hersh, the decision was taken by US President Joe Biden after 9 months of discussions with officials concerned about national security issues. It was concluded from Hersh's material that the CIA was directly involved in preparing the operation, and that the order was issued by the agency's head, William Burns.
RESPONSE
The disinformation claim attempts to portray Western countries as uninterested in an impartial investigation on the incident and therefore as biased against Russia, while promoting recurring pro-Kremlin disinformation narratives about the Nord Stream sabotage.
First, Hersh's claim that the US blew up the Nord Stream pipelines relies on one anonymous source. Snopes portal asked Hersh to respond to criticism that his article's claims are based on a single source and also asked if any undisclosed parties verified or vetted any of that source's assertions as part of his reporting. In response, he told Snopes, that he protects his sources.
A number of factcheckers have pointed to numerous flaws in Hersh's story, which has received significant attention from Kremlin.
Recent works by Hersh has been controversial and widely panned by journalists for promoting conspiratorial claims that hinge on dubious anonymous sources or speculation. Examples of controversial claims made later in Hersh's career include allegations that Turkey, not Russia, was behind a chemical weapons attack in Syria, and that Trump authorised an airstrike in Syria in response to Russia's alleged use of chemical weapons, even while knowing Russia did not use such weapons.
As for the claim that the West rejects investigating the incidence, this is completely unfounded as there are three ongoing comprehensive investigations by Denmark, Sweden and Germany into the incident. The United States and NATO, as well as the three investigating countries, are not trying to block any investigation, they are not part of these, and have described the explosion as an act of sabotage.
Given the complex nature of these types of investigations, it is not unusual for them to take some time to reach a clear and authoritative conclusion. Many countries have pointed to the dangers of jumping into preordained and premature conclusions, as Russia does by pointing fingers to the United States.
See similar cases that Nord Stream pipelines were blown up by US intelligence, that the US benefits from destroying of Nord Stream because it can now sell more liquefied natural gas to Europe; that the US blew up Nord Stream so that the EU would arm Ukraine, and that Nord Stream destruction was an American terrorist attack.