Results of investigation on Nord Stream pipeline sabotage will not be made public because it is better to have “war in Ukraine” than “war in Europe” – Gonchar

Read in Google News!

Earlier I noted that the “Ukrainian trace” in the explosion of the Nord Streams is an attempt by certain circles to show that the US, Europe, Britain and … russia are not involved in this sabotage, writes President of Centre for Global Studies “Strategy XXI” Michael Gonchar.

The New York Times wrote: “Some initial US and European speculation focused on possible russian culpability, especially given its prowess in underwater operations, although it is unclear what motivation the kremlin would have for blowing up the pipelines, given that they were an important source of revenue and a means for moscow to exert influence in Europe… US officials say they have found no evidence that the russian government was involved in the attack… US officials said no Americans or Brits were involved.”

It was reported that American intelligence found no evidence of russian involvement in the incident. The Times reported on March 8, 2023 that in the West it was already known a week after the sabotage that it was not russia or the US behind it, but a private Ukrainian enterprise. It is worth recalling that at the end of 2022, information was already appearing in the Western media with the reference to “some Western leaders”, “numerous officials”, “23 diplomats and intelligence officers from nine countries” that the several-month investigation did not confirm russian involvement in the sabotage, without specifying anyone else.

I assume that there are no real results of the investigation (because the russian version was excluded as such, allegedly due to the lack of a motive), or results will not be made public, because it is better to have a “war in Ukraine” than a “war in Europe”, as they imagine. After all, evidence of russian authorship of sabotage will lead to the need for tough actions that will cause “escalation” and may lead to “NATO war with russia.” That is why we see the version about the Ukrainian group, which was initially presented with the “indulgence” to the official authorities of Ukraine. They say that non-state actors are capable of such things in times of hybrid wars… The latest modification of this version already indicates that the president of Ukraine was aware of it, approved it, but, they say, later tried to stop the operation, however, unsuccessfully. That is, the authors of this version still leave a portion of the “indulgence” to Zelensky.

Although official representatives in the US or European capitals did not agree with the “Ukrainian version”, it seems that there are some influential people on both sides of the Atlantic who want to implement a “special operation to force the parties to peace”. Well, at least with a temporary ceasefire, so that it can be presented as a success of diplomacy.

Signal to russia is something like this: We have known everything for a long time, but we will not officially announce that the sabotage was organized under the auspices of the Main Directorate of Deep-Sea Research of the russian Defense Ministry and two special units of the Baltic Fleet, just as you will stop accusing us. In the end, investigations will never be able to definitively establish authorship, and you will not press charges against us.

At the same time, the “Ukrainian trace” is also a signal to Kyiv. Like, we don’t see Ukraine’s official involvement in sabotage now, but it may turn out that further investigation will find certain evidence (a hint of the 2002 “Kolchuga” case), and certain “witnesses” of the preparation and implementation of sabotage may “be found”. As early as March 12, 2023, Politico wrote about the “points of tension” between Washington and Kyiv and mentioned, among other things, “sabotage on the gas pipeline”, and now even more – allegedly the names of the performers are known and the German prosecutor’s office is looking for them. Therefore, they say, it is better to go to the negotiating table with the russians on a broad range of issues.

The broad range of issues includes a ceasefire and, as a first step, the parties’ refusal to damage critical energy infrastructure (CEI). The most important confirmation of this information is in the columns of the Washington Post, which has been circulating since July regarding the negotiations in Qatar, allegedly with the mediation of Doha. In fact, Qatar was offered an idea from Washington and asked to pitch it to the parties as Doha’s own idea. This month, Ukraine and russia were to send delegations to Doha to negotiate an agreement that would end strikes on energy infrastructure on both sides.

The idea itself is logical. But there is a problem. These are strikes by the Armed Forces of Ukraine on the occupied territories, which the occupier considers their “new regions.” And it is unlikely that they would make an exception in Qatar, because then it means that de facto moscow recognizes the fact of occupying the territories of the neighboring country. It is, of course, unacceptable for them. As well as our demand to free the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant and return it to the control of Ukraine. However, given the operational situation, they can agree to some amorphous ambiguous wording so that we also agree and sign the agreement, and then when the time is right strike our CEI, motivating it by the fact that the Ukrainian side does not comply with the provisions of the agreement. Therefore, we cannot agree with such a plan, but the Bidenists are ready to push it, because they need some intermediate results that confirm the effectiveness of their “diplomacy on the table” approach to ending the “war in Ukraine”.

Читай у Google News!