Featured Image
President Joe Biden speaks about voting rights at the National Constitution Center on July 13, 2021, in Philadelphia, PennsylvaniaPhoto by Drew Angerer/Getty Images

(LifeSiteNews) — In a remarkable debut on Substack, the award-winning writer Seymour Hersh claims that the United States Government is responsible for blowing up the Nord Stream pipelines which supplied Russian gas to Germany.

The claims, which are furnished with circumstantial evidence and anonymous testimony, demonstrate that the United States was determined to destroy the economy of Europe through an act of war – upon one of its own NATO allies. 

Hersh, who won a Pulitzer prize in 1970, has produced some of the most revealing investigations of U.S. Government covert operations. He was responsible for exposing the transfer of Libyan armaments to Syrian rebels by Hillary Clinton’s Department of State in a 2014 piece which revealed  U.S. and Turkish cooperation in the creation of violent jihadist groups in Syria. 

The latest offering from Seymour Hersh relies on the evidence of a whistleblower who reveals the key details of the operation:  

  • How it was done 
  • Who carried it out 
  • Who ordered it 
  • Who spoke against it 

To some, these revelations simply vindicate the belief the West was behind the destruction of this crucial piece of strategic infrastructure. The media preferred to suggest the absurd notion that the Russians had blown up their own pipelines, which they had spent billions of dollars and which had taken almost two decades to complete. 

The U.S. Government and its media organs have issued firm denials of any involvement. This is a position which is inconsistent with the public statements of top U.S. government officials. Jake Sullivan, Antony Blinken, Victoria Nuland and President Joe Biden himself are all on record stating their interest in stopping Nord Stream 2 from opening as planned in 2023.

Hersh cites the attention given by U.S. senators such as Ted Cruz to the dominant position enjoyed by Russia in the European energy market, being a major supplier of cheap pipeline oil and gas. These debates are said to have prompted Biden to order a means of remote and timed detonation to be placed during BALTOPS22, a NATO naval exercise that occurred last summer.  

During the planning stage, the gravity of such an act was made plain to the Biden administration 

The CIA argued that whatever was done, it would have to be covert. Everyone involved understood the stakes. ‘This is not kiddie stuff,’ the source said. If the attack were traceable to the United States, ‘It’s an act of war.’

Hersh reports that the planning went ahead regardless, taking into account frequent Russian patrols in the region and the high probability of the operation being discovered. 

Throughout ‘all of this scheming,’ the source said, ‘some working guys in the CIA and the State Department were saying, ‘Don’t do this. It’s stupid and will be a political nightmare if it comes out.’’

Hersh describes the methods employed to detonate the pipelines, and notes how the media first suggested Russian culpability, before dropping the issue entirely. With this report making the news, Hersh is described as a “discredited journalist” whose work is a “gift to Putin.” Reporting facts is of course routinely described as enemy propaganda these days, and it is tempting to see this type of condemnation as a indication that a truth embarrassing to power has been revealed. 

The alternative explanations simply do not make sense. The countries which neighbor the site of the explosions, Denmark, Germany and Sweden immediately announced a joint investigation into the attacks.  

The process quickly fell apart, with the countries refusing to share their findings, and Sweden stating that what they had discovered touched on national security issues too sensitive to mention. This prompted the Russian government to suggest the Swedes had something to hide in refusing to make public the outcome of their probe into the blasts. 

The EU President Josip Borrell threatened retaliation for the attacks on a supply line which provided up to 40 percent of German gas needs.  

Any deliberate disruption of European energy infrastructure is utterly unacceptable and will be met with a robust and united response.

What response to the U.S. could he have in mind, other than to acquiesce in the destruction of the German industrial base which funds much of the European Union? German industry cannot survive the severe disruption and price inflation caused by the sudden removal of cheap Russian gas. It is unclear how the euro, and the European Union, will continue to function without the German exports which formerly filled its coffers and underwrote its budgets.  

The fallout from this act of war, as the CIA itself described it, is likely to far outweigh the immediate benefit to the U.S. economy in the resulting gas boom. Whilst Americans today may enjoy record profits from shares in the liquefied natural gas (LNG) export sector, the cost to U.S. prestige and power will be permanent and severe. 

How secure is any alliance in which the dominant partner attacks its allies? How stable is the vaunted “rules based order” when destroying your allies’ energy supply is permitted? The European Union is effectively being plundered by the nation which nominally guarantees its security. The EU itself, and NATO, will be destabilized by the serious and sudden economic decline in Western Europe which is the result of destruction of Nord Stream and the sanctions on cheap Russian oil and gas. 

The view from outside NATO will hardly be improved. How will other countries perceive the U.S. and its values when it sees how close an ally such as Germany can be treated? 

The real shock is not that the pipelines were destroyed on the orders of the United States government. It is the startling short-termism of its planning, being concerned with jam today and utterly indifferent to the way in which this reckless act has damaged the future of the West entirely. 

The result of this type of action is to further undermine any claims to legitimacy made by the United States, and to call into question the nature of any alliance undertaken with them as a partner. This move signifies not strength, but desperation. It appears the U.S. government has degraded morally, legally and financially to the point where it is vampirizing its closest friends and neighbors. Aside from the debauchery of such a condition, it is alarmingly myopic. The most powerful nation in the world is ruled by people with no concern for the consequences of their actions.