On Friday (April 7), the American newspaper The New York Times (NYT) published a contentious piece, arguing that it is in the best interests of everyone to not know the truth about the 2022 Nord Stream pipeline sabotage.
The article, authored by a journalist named Erika Solomon, claimed, “Naming a culprit could set off unintended consequences.” She went on to suggest that ‘naming’ Russia could lead to demands for a ‘response’ from the Western allies.
“Claiming Russia was behind the attack would mean it had successfully sabotaged major critical infrastructure in Western Europe’s backyard and could spark demands for a response,” Solomon wrote.
“Blaming Ukrainian operatives could stoke internal debate in Europe about support for their eastern neighbour. And naming a Western nation or operatives could trigger deep mistrust when the West is struggling to maintain a united front,” she further added.
Erika Solomon managed to find a ‘military expert’ named Jens Wenzel Kristoffersen to back her contentious proposition. “There are strategic reasons for not revealing who did it. As long as they don’t come out with anything substantial, then we are left in the dark on all this — as it should be,” he suggested.
The sudden change in the stance of The New York Times comes two days after Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Seymour Hersh called out the American daily for parroting the CIA (US intelligence agency)’s version of the underwater bombing of Nord Stream 1 and Nord Stream 2 gas pipelines.
It must be mentioned that the American journalist had earlier accused the US Navy of blowing up the Nord Stream pipelines in an explosive piece in February this year.
In a Substack newsletter published on Wednesday (April 5), Seymour Hersh stated, “Within weeks of my report that Joe Biden ordered the destruction of the Nord Stream pipelines, the agency produced a cover story and found willing takers in the New York Times and two major German publications.”
He lambasted the American newspaper for peddling the story, concocted by the Central Investigation Agency, to shield the role of the US government in the 2022 Nord Stream pipeline sabotage.
The Background of the Controversy
On March 7 this year, The New York Times published an article wherein it cited new Intelligence to claim the role of Russian/ Ukrainian nationals in the sabotage.
“Officials who have reviewed the intelligence said they believed the saboteurs were most likely Ukrainian or Russian nationals, or some combination of the two. US officials said no American or British nationals were involved,” it stated.
Citing officials, NYT further added, “The explosives were most likely planted with the help of experienced divers who did not appear to be working for military or intelligence services, U.S. officials who have reviewed the new intelligence said.”
German law enforcement officials had initially claimed that a 6-member Ukranian group forged passports and chartered a 15-metre yacht named ‘Andromeda’ to carry out the destruction of Nord pipelines. However, they backtracked from this theory earlier this month.
Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Seymour Hersh slammed the likes of The New York Times for failing to question the ‘dubious’ Andromeda story and blindly relying on Intelligence inputs. He said that the story was fed by the CIA to both the US and German media as well as the latter’s Intelligence service.
“By creating a story of deep sea divers and a crew who did not exist, the agency was following protocol, and the story would have been part of the first days of secret planning to destroy the pipelines…The cover story was shared with and supported by the BND, Germany’s federal intelligence service,” Hersh noted.
Under fire from the veteran American journalist, The New York Times was forced to make quick amends and come up with an intriguing piece that neither discredits their original CIA cover story nor encourages an in-depth investigation into the Nord Stream pipeline sabotage.
Journalist Erika Solomon found the solution to the fix – Don’t name the culprit!!!
