Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov, commenting on the leaks, said: “As for some pro-Ukrainian ‘Doctor Evil’ who organized this: it’s hard to believe it, it was too difficult a task that only a well-trained state special service, of which there are not so many in our world.” He urged not to “divert attention from certain minor versions and assumptions”, but to carry out a “prompt and transparent investigation into the terrorist act” with the participation of Russia. Peskov believes that the fuss of the Americans and the British with the simultaneous stuffing in the media of different versions is explained by attempts to smooth out the “embarrassment” in relations with Germany due to the gas pipeline explosion.
A New York Times article, whose US intelligence sources tried to portray the organizers of the attack as some sort of pro-Ukrainian group not associated with official Kiev, was ridiculed by Chinese Consul General in Belfast Zhang Meifang. “The NYT publication, citing US officials blaming a ‘pro-Ukrainian group’, sowed confusion in the situation with the Nord Stream gas pipeline explosions. But that did not convince the public, as some asked the question : ‘The group is called the Biden Administration?’ your Twitter.
The fuss of the United States and Britain with the stuffing in the media is explained by attempts to iron out the “embarrassment” in relations with Germany due to the gas pipeline explosion
Despite the differences in versions that have filled the Western media, it is easy to see that they are all trying to refute the recent investigation by journalist Seymour Hersh. According to his sources in the United States, the explosion was staged by the American and Norwegian military, and President Joe Biden personally authorized the operation. Among the evidence, for example, are the flights of US and Norwegian military aircraft into the area of the explosions both on the day of the terrorist attack and shortly before.
But in the new leaks from the Western press, this data is circumvented. The Wall Street Journal, citing unnamed US administration officials, said the CIA had information about the preparation of a terrorist attack on Nord Stream by a certain Ukrainian group in the summer of 2022. It is alleged that the Americans passed information on three Ukrainian citizens to the German Federal Intelligence Service. Although the publication indicates that Washington initially considered the possibility of involvement of the Ukrainian authorities in the terrorist attack, then, as in other articles on this subject, it is separately pointed out that this group would not have any connection with the official Kiev. The newspaper also clears the main person responsible for the organization of the terrorist attacks according to Hersh – the director of the CIA William Burns and the American national security adviser Jake Sullivan, saying that they were the ones who suspected Ukraine. This stuffing ends with the conclusion that there is little evidence and the truth may never be established.
The British newspaper The Daily Telegraph writes that Western countries are unlikely to release the name of the Ukrainian businessman allegedly involved in the gas pipeline explosions in order to keep the West united on the aid issue. military in Kiev.
Western media columnists join the stuff of reporters on Nord Stream. The columnist of the British magazine The Spectator Mark Galeotti explains the version expressed in the New York Times about a certain pro-Ukrainian group by the fact that Kiev would be unable to control various paramilitary groups in the country. Galeotti claims the NYT article is a warning from the United States to Ukrainian authorities.
<
p class="">While the latter are wondering, the American administration tries rather clumsily to pretend that it has nothing to do with the massive leak of data from the special services to several media at the same time. White House National Security Council spokeswoman Adrianne Watson said the NYT release is not based on officially declassified intelligence released by the US administration.
According to the Hersh investigation, on the day of the attack, a Norwegian military plane flew over the area of the explosion, detonating explosives (Visualization of the Chinese channel CGTN) Photo: Social networks
While the government of German Chancellor Olaf Scholz is dutifully silent, some German politicians are asking questions. For example, Steffen Cotret, MP for the Alternative for Germany party, said: "It is surprising that for six months (after the Nord Stream attacks) nothing happened. Neither the federal government nor other countries have published results. Suddenly, after the publications of Seymour Hersh, we are now being told of a Ukrainian grouping." “The fact that the relevant information is only published now does not speak in favor of the transparency of the investigation,” he concludes.
An attempt to attribute the operation to a certain group does not seem plausible. "The group is called the Biden administration?" – Interviewed in China
Meanwhile, this kind of press briefing for US intelligence agencies is nothing new. Likewise, first through media leaks and then at the official level, the American and global public was prepared for the American invasion of Iraq in 2003. The apotheosis of this information campaign was US Secretary of State Colin Powell's speech, test tube in hand, at a meeting of the UN Security Council.
Moreover, US intelligence agencies use these techniques even at the intra-US level. For example, in 2016, the election of Donald Trump as President of the United States caused the rejection of a significant part of the American state apparatus, including in the special services criticized by him. Throughout Trump’s years of rule, the American press has been inundated with leaks aimed at casting a shadow over his legitimacy. Anonymous intelligence officials were particularly active and leaked information to the media about alleged collusion between Trump’s campaign headquarters and Russian officials, although it was later revealed that Russiagate only existed. in the imagination of Trump’s opponents.
