Nord Stream Sabotage As A Whodunit Misses The Point

His military had already inflicted almost 15,000 civilian casualties , and September 2022 saw the start of sustained attacks on critical Ukrainian infrastructure , including dams, railways, hospitals, schools and the energy grid.

Built and operated by a consortium led by the majority state-owned Gazprom , the Nord Stream pipelines expanded Russia's ability to weaponize energy by exerting control over natural gas pricing and rates of flow.

For this reason, Putin's adversaries, including Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, during the construction of Nord Stream 2 in 2021 viewed the pipeline as a dangerous geopolitical weapon .

Nord Stream 2's completion meant Russia's gas delivery to Europe – much of which is dependent on Russia for its natural gas needs – could largely bypass Ukraine and end the need to pay transit fees to both Ukraine and Poland.

As such, Ukraine had a clear interest in stopping the flow of gas through the Nord Stream pipelines. So, too, did Russia's competitors in the European energy market, including Norway and the United States. German political parties advocating for energy transition toward sustainable and renewable sources arguably had the same interest in stopping the gas flow.

Despite being completed, Nord Stream 2 was not in use when Russia launched its full-scale invasion, having been blocked by German energy regulators . And Nord Stream 1, which had entered service in 2012, was shut down indefinitely by Russia in August 2022 .

As such, it wasn't such a jump for Western analysts to accuse Russia of destroying its own now-useless pipeline to signal its willingness and capacity to attack undersea infrastructure.

But as time passed, this view was crowded out by stories that treated the sabotage as a real-life whodunit mystery , with a focus on uncovering motives and means. Attempting to crack the case, investigative journalists and other analysts studied statements in the public record, leaks from alleged whistleblowers, geospatial data, financial records and even reenactments of the attack.

Some, including Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Seymour Hersh, traced responsibility all the way to the CIA and the Oval Office .

Unable to corroborate Hersh's story, most US media opted against echoing its claims, and the White House has consistently denied them .

Hersh's take includes a belief that powerful Western interests pressured investigators and fed stories to the media to conceal the truth .

This second-order speculation – claiming that the original crime has been compounded by a cover-up – has long been promoted by Russia, too. After Sweden and Denmark halted their investigations, Moscow's representative to the United Nations Security Council, Vasily Nebenzya, called for the UN to take over the investigation, saying:“It is as if a crime was committed - a murder - and a year later, the investigative authorities concluded that the victim was murdered .”

Russia has since accused German prosecutors of preparing to close the investigation without identifying those responsible.

The appeal of this framing to Moscow is clear. First, it fits Putin's argument that NATO is constantly scheming against Russia. And second, it offers the promise of Russia recouping the cost of the Nord Stream sabotage from insurance companies. Insurers have so far refused to pay out, citing official findings that the sabotage was“an act of war .”

Moscow, in its relentless pursuit of proof of NATO and US complicity, isn't likely to be satisfied by the German investigation's single arrest warrant. Russia wants to put the US in the dock, too.

After all, President Joe Biden did threaten NATO action to shut down Nord Stream early in 2022. And Moscow responded to the German warrant for the arrest of a Ukrainian by doubling down on its accusation that the US ordered the attack .

Here, Russia could lean on the words of high-profile US figures such as Republican Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene, who has repeated disinformation from confirmed Russian propaganda outlets , and former Fox News host Tucker Carlson, who praised the quality of life in Moscow during a much-criticized Putin interview.

After the Nord Stream blasts, both Greene and Carlson were quick to assert that Russia was not responsible and, by implication, that the U.S. may have had a role.

Sign up for one of our free newsletters

• The Daily Report Start your day right with Asia Times' top stories
• AT Weekly Report A weekly roundup of Asia Times' most-read stories

Truth isn't the goal

Keeping the Nord Stream“mystery” alive distracts attention from Russia's documented crimes in Ukraine, including attacking civilian infrastructure and, according to the UN Human Rights Council , displaying a“disregard for basic principles of humanitarian law and its human rights obligations.”

In the years since the Nord Stream blast, Russia has leaned on its extensive capacities in disinformation and propaganda to push its narrative. In this, Russia has form.

In January 2022, US government sources reported that Russia was staging attacks against pro-Russian civilians in eastern Ukraine and was, to justify the invasion, blaming Kiev. Similarly, analysts have cited the supposed May 2023 Ukrainian drone attack on Moscow as an example of Soviet-style“false flag” operations .

It is this track record that has prompted German security personnel to suspect that in regard to Nord Stream, the evidence trail leading to Ukraine was fabricated by Russian operatives .

Speculation is seductive, and the Nord Stream case has attracted its fair share over the past two years – a period during which Russia has pursued a broad campaign to sow deliberate lies and disinformation. In that same period, Putin has persistently violated international law.

Russia's narrative on Nord Stream may well, when all the investigations are said and done, be the dominant one. But what is clear is that Putin's accusations against Ukraine and the United States are motivated not by a commitment to justice but by a drive to disrupt and distract. Truth is not his goal but, rather, a target.

Keith Brown is a professor of politics and global studies at Arizona State University .

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article .

Already have an account? Sign i Sign up here to comment on Asia Times stories OR

Thank you for registering!

An account was already registered with this email. Please check your inbox for an authentication link.