UN Security Council Won’t Probe Nord Stream Bombing

UNITED NATIONS, 3 Apr 2023

Dave DeCamp | Antiwar - TRANSCEND Media Service

The only members that voted in favor of investigating the sabotage were Russia, China and Brazil.

Peoples Dispatch

28 Mar 2023 – The UN Security Council voted yesterday against a Russian effort to get an independent investigation into the bombings of the Nord Stream natural gas pipelines that connect Russia to Germany.

The only members of the Council that voted in favor of the resolution were Russia, China and Brazil. The remaining 12 members abstained from the vote–including the US, the likely culprit of the attacks.

The resolution had little chance of passing since it needed at least nine votes in favor and no veto from any of the five permanent members of the Security Council: the US, China, Russia, Britain, and France.

Russia has been pushing for an international inquiry into the Nord Stream sabotage since investigative journalist Seymour Hersh published a bombshell report in February that alleged President Biden ordered the bombings.

Hersh’s report said US Navy divers planted explosives on the pipelines in June 2022 under the cover of NATO exercises in the Baltic Sea. The operation was carried out with Norway, and a Norwegian spy plane dropped a sonar buoy on September 26, 2022, that detonated the explosives.

The US has denied responsibility for the bombing, and The New York Times recently published a story that claimed US officials believe a “pro-Ukrainian group” might be responsible for the sabotage. But according to Hersh, the new narrative was planted by the CIA after members of the spy agency were ordered to concoct a cover story to point responsibility away from the US following a meeting between President Biden and German Chancellor Olaf Scholz.

___________________________________________

Dave DeCamp is the news editor of antiwar.com.

Go to Original – news.antiwar.com


Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Share this article:


DISCLAIMER: The statements, views and opinions expressed in pieces republished here are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of TMS. In accordance with title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. TMS has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is TMS endorsed or sponsored by the originator. “GO TO ORIGINAL” links are provided as a convenience to our readers and allow for verification of authenticity. However, as originating pages are often updated by their originating host sites, the versions posted may not match the versions our readers view when clicking the “GO TO ORIGINAL” links. This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

Comments are closed.