S/PV.9619 Security Council

In accordance with rule 39 of the Council’s provisional rules of procedure, I invite the following briefers to participate in this meeting: Mr. Miroslav Jenča, Assistant Secretary-General for Europe, Central Asia and the Americas, Departments of Political and Peacebuilding Affairs and Peace Operations; Ms. Oguljeren Niyazberdiyeva, Chief of the Office of the Under-Secretary-General, United Nations Office of Counter-Terrorism; and Mr. Larry C. Johnson, political commentator and expert in the field of counter-terrorism. The Security Council will now begin its consideration of the item on its agenda. I give the floor to Mr. Jenča. Mr. Jenča: The destruction of the Nord Stream gas pipelines in September 2022 highlighted the vulnerability of critical commercial and energy infrastructure in the current regional and global context. The incident sparked widespread speculation that risks further fuelling the already heightened tensions and mistrust among Member States. The Council has convened a total of seven times to discuss the issue. I recall that our briefings on this topic are based solely on information that is publicly available. The United Nations does not have any additional details of the events and is not in a position to verify or confirm claims or reports made regarding the incident. I will therefore use this opportunity to recap what has been stated so far. Between 26 and 29 September 2022, four leaks were reported in the Nord Stream undersea gas pipelines. Those pipelines are located in international waters, within the Swedish and Danish economic zones in the Baltic Sea. The first leak was reported on the Nord Stream 2 pipeline in the morning of 26 September 2022. Later that day, the second and third leaks were reported on the Nord Stream 1 pipeline. The fourth leak was reported on 29 September on the Nord Stream 2 pipeline. While the pipelines were not in operation at the time of the incidents, they reportedly contained several hundred million cubic meters of natural gas. In February 2023, the United Nations Environment Programme estimated the plausible range of total methane emissions leaked during the incident to be between 75,000 and 230,000 metric tons. The full extent of the environmental impacts of the incident, including on marine and local wildlife, is yet to be grasped. After the leaks were reported, the Danish, German and Swedish authorities announced the launch of separate national investigations. The authorities concerned provided updates on their respective investigations, including in a joint letter addressed to the President of the Security Council dated 10 July 2023 (S/2023/517). The letter indicated that, according to the investigations, the leaks were caused by the use of explosives. The authorities also reported having informed the Russian Federation about the progress of the investigations. In a letter dated 25 August 2023 from the Permanent Representative of the Russian Federation to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General and the President of the Security Council (S/2023/627), the Russian Federation expressed concerns about those national investigations and called for comprehensive and objective proceedings. In February this year, the Danish and the Swedish authorities informed about the closure of their respective investigations in joint letters from the Permanent Representatives of Denmark, Germany and Sweden to the United Nations addressed to the President of the Security Council dated 7 and 26 February 2024 (S/2024/149 and S/2024/189). We look forward to hearing about the findings and conclusions of the ongoing German investigation in due time. In a letter from the Permanent Representative of the Russian Federation to the United Nations dated 1 March 2024 addressed to the Secretary-General and the President of the Security Council (S/2024/230), the Russian Federation reiterated its concerns and that they see a need for an international commission to investigate the Nord Stream incidents further. We reiterate that any intentional damage to critical civilian infrastructure is of serious concern and should be condemned and investigated. In the current sensitive security context, we urge everyone to exercise restraint while we wait for the remaining investigation to conclude and for the information to be shared accordingly. We strongly encourage Member States to continue cooperation and sharing of information to ensure the security of all international waters, including the Baltic Sea, which is critical for regional commerce, security and stability.

I thank Mr. Jenča for his briefing. I now give the floor to Ms. Niyazberdiyeva. Ms. Niyazberdiyeva: It is an honour to appear before the Security Council, a body entrusted with the solemn responsibility of maintaining international peace and security. I am here today on behalf of the United Nations Office of Counter Terrorism (UNOCT). The Council has a long and admirable record of consensus and leadership on the issue of terrorism. Its resolutions have bolstered and harmonized global counter-terrorism efforts, fostering cooperation, information-sharing, and capacity-building. The territorial defeat of Da’esh, the reduced presence of Al-Qaida, and the decline in terrorism-related fatalities over the last decade stand as testaments to the collective efforts of the international community against this scourge. The unwavering leadership of the Security Council in these endeavours has been crucial. Both the Security Council and the General Assembly have repeatedly affirmed that compliance with international law, including international human rights law and international humanitarian law, forms the bedrock of the fight against terrorism. The United Nations Office of Counter-Terrorism, established in 2017, assists Member States in implementing the United Nations Global Counter- Terrorism Strategy and its successive review resolutions. Our mandate comprises: first, providing leadership on counter-terrorism mandates entrusted to the Secretary- General by the General Assembly; secondly, enhancing coordination and coherence across the counter-terrorism architecture, primarily through our coordination of the Global Counter-Terrorism Coordination Compact; thirdly, strengthening capacity-building assistance to Member States; fourthly, improving visibility, advocacy, and resource mobilization for counter- terrorism efforts and; fifthly, ensuring that due priority is given to counter-terrorism across the United Nations system and that the important work on preventing violent extremism is firmly rooted in the Strategy. However, UNOCT is not vested with the mandate to investigate or assess the conduct of States or other actors. As noted by Assistant Secretary-General Jenča, the United Nations Secretariat does not have any additional details of the events and is not in a position to verify or confirm claims or reports made regarding the incident. Despite progress, the threat of terrorism persists. The eighth review of the United Nations Global Counter- Terrorism Strategy and the Secretary-General’s policy brief on a New Agenda for Peace underscore the need for collective efforts and comprehensive approaches to defeat the scourge of terrorism. UNOCT remains committed to reinvigorating multilateralism and supporting Member States to build a world free from terrorism, guided by the Charter of the United Nations and international law.

I thank Ms. Niyazberdiyeva for her briefing. I now give the floor to Mr. Johnson. Mr. Johnson: I extend my compliments to the members of the Security Council. My name is Larry Johnson. I am here today to speak in support of Russia’s desire to have the Security Council conduct an open and comprehensive investigation of the sabotage of the Nord Stream pipeline in September 2022. I am here at my own expense, without compensation for my time. All material and comments are my own. My goal in addressing the Council today is simple — I want to propose steps that I believe can help resolve the mystery of the source of the attack on the Nord Steam pipeline and, thus, help resolve the tensions that resulted from that unprecedented attack. I bring, perhaps, a unique perspective to this issue because of my past experience with intelligence operations and analysis during my time with the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), with counter- terrorism policy and investigations while serving in the State Department’s Office of Counterterrorism, with the scripting and execution of more than 200 counter- terrorism training missions for United States military special operations forces, while working as a contractor, and with successful international money laundering investigations carried out, in my role as the managing partner of BERG Associates. One of those investigations included a successful case conducted on behalf of the European Union and the Governors of Colombia. Let me start with President Harry S. Truman. I think I am the only one in this Chamber who grew up in Independence, Missouri and attended middle school across the street from Mr. Truman’s home. I had the privilege of meeting Mr. Truman briefly one morning, in September 1970, as he strolled up North Delaware Street towards his Presidential Library, accompanied by a single bodyguard. What a difference 54 years makes. It is true that Mr. Truman presided over the start of the Cold War between the United States and the Soviet Union. That is an unfortunate legacy. But I want to remind the Council of Mr. Truman’s words to the fledgling United Nations in October 1950. This 74-year- old message is still relevant and worth remembering: “At the present time, the fear of another great international war overshadows all the hopes of mankind. This fear arises from the tensions between nations and from the recent outbreak of open aggression in Korea. We in the United States believe that such a war can be prevented. We do not believe that war is inevitable. One of the strongest reasons for this belief is our faith in the United Nations. The United Nations has three great roles to play in preventing wars. First, it provides a way for negotiation and the settlement of disputes among nations by peaceful means. Secondly, it provides a way of utilizing the collective strength of Member nations, under the Charter, to prevent aggression. Thirdly, it provides a way through which, once the danger of aggression is reduced, the nations can be relieved of the burden of armaments.” (A/PV.295, para. 46 and 47) I believe it is not only the responsibility, but also the sacred duty of the Security Council to take the lead in bringing about a settlement of the Nord Stream matter by peaceful means. I will not review the mountain of evidence that implicates my own country, the United States, in this act of war against the Russian Federation and the Federal Republic of Germany. There was no compelling national security interest to justify the destruction of the Nord Stream pipeline, which has inflicted significant economic pain on the people of Germany. This attack accomplished nothing in terms of helping bring an end to the conflict between Russia and Ukraine and Ukraine’s NATO facilitators. It made matters worse. During my time at the CIA, I acquired an understanding of how covert action was planned and executed in places as diverse as Afghanistan and Central America. Such operations are not conducted at the spur of the moment. They are funded, planned and rehearsed before being executed. Seymour Hersh’s account of United States covert action against the Nord Stream pipeline is consistent with the knowledge I acquired during my time at the Agency in the late 1980s. When I began working for Ambassador Morris Busby in the Office of the Coordinator for Counterterrorism, in the United States State Department, in the fall of 1989, one of my first tasks was getting country clearances for the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) as they investigated the terrorist bombing of Pan Am Flight PA-103, which crashed in Lockerbie, Scotland in December 1988. One of the most important lessons I drew from that experience, which I believe is relevant to the Nord Stream matter, was the difference between a criminal investigation and intelligence activities. Great care was exercised to ensure that the evidence gathered by the FBI was neither tainted nor spoiled by intelligence activities. It was a fine line, but Ambassador Busby made sure that the FBI and the CIA stayed in their own lanes. Maybe that is the most important lesson of all — the leadership demonstrated by Ambassador Busby. Professional, mature leadership is essential to the successful investigation of complex, international operations that result in attacks like Pan Am Flight PA-103 and the Nord Stream pipeline. Although the criminal indictments against the two men implicated in carrying out the bombing did not come until November 1991, the evidence that cracked the case was in hand by March 1990 — only 15 months after Pan Am Flight PA-103 fell from the skies, and 20 months before the criminal indictments. Compare that investigation with the indifference and lack of curiosity demonstrated by the NATO countries with respect to Nord Stream. It has been 19 months since the pipeline was destroyed, and the NATO countries appear to have adopted the posture of the three wise monkeys — see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil. I have some insight into the logistics and execution of the attack on Nord Stream, thanks to work I did on behalf of the United States military’s special operations forces. That work commenced in the spring of 1994 and ended in 2016. During those 22 years, I was part of a team that scripted multiple counter-terrorism exercises. We would create scenarios, such as a group threatening to use a biological weapon in a North African country, and then replicate the diplomatic and intelligence traffic reporting the threat to stimulate a response by the particular military and diplomatic force tasked to both analyse, contain and defeat the threat. In the course of that work, we also had to think like saboteurs or terrorists, understand their motives, understand the capabilities required to carry out such an attack and identify the kinds of resources and training that would underpin such a terrorist operation. Four years after I started consulting with the United States military, I, along with four others, started BERG Associates. Two of my partners previously served with the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA). One ended his career as Chief of International Operations of DEA, and the other ran store-front undercover money laundering operations in New York City. One of our first jobs was the investigation of what is commonly known as the Bank of New York Russian money laundering case. We also organized the investigation and collection of evidence that was used to file a civil Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act case against major tobacco companies, which were laundering money for drug cartels. Two separate causes of action were filed on behalf of the plaintiffs the European Union and the Governors of Colombia. My point in mentioning that history is to emphasize that even in complex international investigations, without access to classified material, we were able to gather massive quantities of evidence, which would have been admissible and stood up in a United States criminal court. In doing those investigations, I learned that Disneyland has it right — it is a small world after all. The nexus between certain criminal organizations, major international corporations, financial institutions and intelligence organizations is not a fantasy. It is real and involves hundreds of billions of dollars. My experience convinces me that a properly funded investigation carried out by professionals will uncover documents, informants and eyewitnesses that can prove beyond a reasonable doubt who carried out the Nord Stream pipeline bombing. The nations assembled in this Chamber have one advantage in an investigation that we, as private investigators, did not have. They have signals intelligence and satellites. They have data stored, for example, that can provide intelligence ranging from the movement of ships to the movement of money. When they combine that data with conventional evidence, they have a powerful means for identifying who ordered and executed the bombing of the Nord Stream pipeline. I can say this much with certainty about that operation. It was carried out with the financial and material support of at least one nation State. There are written records, almost certainly highly classified and stored with very limited access. But there may be available evidence outside such classified records that can illuminate the act significantly, if not solve the mystery. My message to Council members today is simple — follow the money. Also ask, cui bono — who benefits? I believe the refusal to conduct a thorough investigation of the matter casts a cloud over the Security Council. In conclusion, I reiterate President Truman’s vision enunciated 74 years ago. Council members have it in their power to provide a way for negotiation and the settlement of disputes among nations by peaceful means. But such negotiations must proceed from a solid, supportable understanding of who performed the act. And I believe Council members can reach that conclusion with a proper investigation that only the members of the Security Council have the power to perform.

I thank Mr. Johnson for his briefing. I shall now give the floor to those members of the Council who wish to make statements.

We thank Assistant Secretary-General Jenča and Ms. Niyazberdiyeva for their briefings. We are grateful to Mr. Larry Johnson, the American political commentator, for his substantive statement. Mr. Johnson, who has extensive experience in the area of counter-terrorism, including working for United States Government agencies, has clearly demonstrated the absurdity of attempts by the United States authorities and their allies to turn a blind eye to and divert the attention of the international community from the terrorist attack on the Nord Stream gas pipelines. Even American citizens themselves can barely hide their outrage at Washington’s actions. It has been more than 18 months since the two branches of the Baltic Sea Nord Stream gas pipelines were blown up. The Security Council has discussed the situation approximately 10 times, both in open and closed meetings. All Security Council members condemned the deliberate destruction of a major cross-border submarine infrastructure object. That event undoubtedly constituted a direct threat to international peace and security. The use of explosive devices targeting a submarine gas pipeline, worth some $17 billion, caused critical damage to the pipeline, resulting in serious environmental consequences and posing a clear danger to navigation in that part of the Baltic Sea. Given the gravity of the crime, many of our Security Council colleagues pinned hopes on the outcomes of national investigations, which Germany, Denmark and Sweden launched immediately after the terrorist act. We were sceptical from the beginning about that, given that Berlin, Copenhagen and Stockholm refused to cooperate with Russia even though it is an interested party. Our doubts grew stronger when those countries flatly refused to appear before the Security Council and report on their work and instead limited themselves to disseminating vague and vacuous letters. Nevertheless, their allies on the Security Council preferred to turn a blind eye to that and encouraged the other Council members to do the same. They said that the three countries should be able to do their work without pressure, and they could present concrete results afterwards. They repeated the mantra that they had full confidence in the authorities of those countries and were convinced of the effectiveness of their investigations. Using that pretext, the Western members of the Security Council did not support two Russian initiatives last year — draft resolution S/2023/212 requesting the Secretary-General to submit his considerations on the formation of an international independent investigation Commission, under United Nations auspices, to conduct an investigation of the incidents and a draft statement by the President of the Security Council expressing concern about the lack of information provided to the international community on the progress of the investigations. The dangerous scenario that the Russian Federation and a number of other colleagues had repeatedly warned the Security Council about unfolded before our very eyes. In February, information was disseminated in the Security Council about the fact that the Danish and Swedish authorities were ending their national investigations. What did they find out? Nothing — the only concrete outcome was the same thing they said in the first days after the terrorist attack, namely, that the Nord Stream pipes had been deliberately destroyed with explosive devices. And while they recognized that fact, they said that there were no grounds for continuing the criminal investigation within their jurisdictions. Therefore, a crime was committed, but no one is going to identify those responsible or hold them to account. It is as if a crime, say a murder, was committed, and then a year later the investigative authorities concluded that the victim indeed had been murdered. The scenario is theatre of the absurd. We know that Sweden, Denmark and Germany have just disseminated another letter that adds nothing to what we are going to say today. However, Western members of the Security Council do not seem embarrassed by this unflattering situation or by the unconvincing conclusions of their allies. Moreover, they have actually staged another act in this absurd performance by sabotaging outright the negotiations on another presidential statement, which we proposed this month. We saw it as a document that would allow us to assess the situation surrounding the destruction of the Nord Stream pipes following the Danish and Swedish investigations. As is expected of good-faith sponsors, we ensured that the draft presidential statement was as well-balanced as possible. Throughout the negotiation process, several Security Council members argued that it was premature to call the destruction of the Nord Stream pipes a terrorist attack. To our surprise, Western countries proved extremely inconvenienced by any reference to the terrorist nature of the attack. That includes any reference to the provisions of an international instrument to which they are parties — the 1997 International Convention for the Suppression of Terrorist Bombings. That raises a logical question: what do our Western colleagues call what happened, if not a terrorist attack? Previously, it seemed to us that their statements in the Council implied that that was precisely how they described it. But there is more to it: when working on the draft presidential statement, we were surprised by a number of other things. Our Western colleagues, contrary to firm facts and basic logic, tried to incorporate into the draft statement praise for Copenhagen and Stockholm for their supposedly effective and impartial investigations. I remind members that those were the same investigations that, a year earlier, had found that the gas pipeline had been blown up. Guided by incomprehensible logic, they also tried to remove from the text any language about a hypothetical possibility of collective efforts taking place after the current investigations with a view to clarifying the circumstances surrounding the incidents. In general, when engaging on the draft, our Western colleagues kept betraying and exposing themselves, demonstrating their total lack of interest in identifying and holding accountable the perpetrators of the Nord Stream attack. There is simply no other explanation for their behaviour. With that understanding, we felt that any further work on the draft statement by the President of the Security Council was pointless. I want to say that in today’s meeting, and I hope that this unseemly situation has made clear to our colleagues from the global South the true intentions of Western delegations regarding the terrorist attacks on the Nord Stream pipes. All they want to do is keep the issue away from the Security Council’s attention, while covering up for their allies, which are not providing the international community with any useful information and which refuse to cooperate with Russia, as stipulated in article 10 of the International Convention for the Suppression of Terrorist Bombings, to which I referred earlier today. In that regard, I would also like to note that all calls from the competent Russian authorities for cooperation in the investigation into the terrorist attack on Nord Stream to their counterparts from the European countries conducting the investigations have been consistently and ostentatiously ignored. Whenever feedback was received, it was nothing more than formal replies. We circulated copies of those communications among Security Council members in 2023 for our colleagues’ reference. Taking into account that unacceptable situation, on 21 and 22 March, the Ministry for Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation sent letters to the Embassies of Denmark, Germany, Sweden and Switzerland in Moscow in connection with the failure of those States to fulfil their obligations under the International Convention for the Suppression of Terrorist Bombings and the International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism. The notes stated that there is a dispute between Russia and those States under those Conventions and contained a request for negotiations on their interpretation and application. We also submitted copies of those letters for circulation as official documents of the Security Council and the General Assembly. I urge all colleagues today to ask themselves: how can we explain a situation in which a State or group of States say that they condemn a crime, while at the same time resisting in every possible way the common efforts to identify the perpetrators? Any reasonable person would suspect foul play. That suspicion only grows if we recall that politicians from that State or group of States called for the crime to be committed and rejoiced when it finally had been committed. We have all seen and heard those statements by senior United States officials and their allies. The United States and its allies then led a coordinated campaign to disseminate absurd, and sometimes contradictory, versions of the events in the Western media. I anticipate that after our statement, our United States colleagues will cry out in indignation, asking us how we can dare to blame them and their allies. If that is the case, perhaps they could take the time to explain what is happening, as well as the confessions of their leaders and the demonstrative sabotage of efforts aimed at launching an international investigation. And when doing so, could they please ensure that they sound like representatives of a permanent member of the Security Council rather than the Mad Hatter from Alice in Wonderland? It is symptomatic of the situation that the private sector has recently joined the ridiculous narrative of the Western political and media establishment. As reported by the media, the insurance companies Lloyd’s of London and Arch Insurance are refusing to pay compensation to the gas pipeline operator, Nord Stream AG, because Nord Stream was allegedly damaged by military operations. It would be very interesting to know what kind of armed conflict is taking place around Bornholm Island, in the exclusive economic zone of Denmark and Sweden, and if those States are actually aware of it. Moreover, the insurers have concluded that the damage to the gas pipelines was done using an explosive device, maliciously and for political reasons, thereby confirming the terrorist nature of the attack. We have no doubt that during today’s meeting our Western colleagues will continue with the same ridiculous and self-exposing praise for the Danish and Swedish authorities that have wasted 18 months, and they will also defend the German investigation, the results of which the international community still knows nothing about. They will continue to talk about the lack of added value in international efforts. Their goals are clear enough — to forever tell this tale of lost time in the hope that the international community will forget about the Nord Stream attack. The thing is, it will not forget, and we will certainly not forget. If the Western narrative already looked unconvincing, now their arguments simply cannot be taken seriously. There is no doubt that an increasing number of Member States are seeing that now. At the same time, we all see that, when convenient, the United States and its allies do not delay investigations. It is enough to recall the damage to the Balticconnector gas pipeline and communications cable connecting Finland and Estonia that occurred on 8 October 2023. Preliminary conclusions of the investigation were made public after only 10 days. Better still, I can give an even more recent example. Even before the publication of preliminary results of the investigation into the terrorist attack on the concert venue Crocus City Hall near Moscow, which took place a month ago, the United States and its allies, contrary to objective facts, concluded within 24 hours that the Kyiv regime had nothing to do with it, and tried — and are still trying to do so, for that matter — to convince us that the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant was involved. It is unbelievable. They were able to take action in that case, but somehow they failed to and are preventing others from doing so regarding the Nord Stream blasts. I wonder if Washington realizes how absurd that looks. Or do they take the rest of the world for fools? In any event, we would once again like to underscore that Russia and other constructively minded States will not allow this issue to be put on the back burner. Since Denmark and Sweden have already formally testified to their own impotence, and Germany is not sharing any updates on the progress of the investigation — if there even is one — it should be obvious to everyone that it is only possible to ascertain the true circumstances of what happened through international cooperation, and despite the efforts of a United States-led group of countries that are willing to cover up the tracks. Otherwise, we will find ourselves in a world without rules or legality, where any State could fall victim to a terrorist attack against critical transnational pipeline infrastructure, carried out by the well-known pioneers of the rules-based order. Let me assure members that, no matter how hard the perpetrators try, they will not get away with it. Our country will continue to use every means at our disposal to make sure of it. We call on all reasonable States not associated with the Nord Stream terrorist attacks to support our efforts and together send a strong and unequivocal message that terrorist attacks targeting cross-border submarine pipeline infrastructure is unacceptable. We must push back against the so-called rules-based order using international law.

Mozambique thanks the presidency of Malta for convening this important meeting. We are grateful to the briefers, Assistant Secretary-General Miroslav Jenča, Ms. Oguljeren Niyazberdiyeva and Mr. Larry Johnson. In our previous meetings, we have expressed our support for the speedy conclusion of an objective, impartial, credible and professional inquiry. In that regard, we take note of the information submitted by Denmark and Sweden to the effect that they have concluded their investigation on the issue of Nord Stream. The two countries indicated that there was a deliberate sabotage, but they found insufficient grounds to pursue a criminal case. We hold the view that impunity should not be an option for such a blatant breach of international law. It would otherwise embolden those who have perpetrated such acts. More importantly, it would weaken the very foundation of international cooperation. In that regard, we would like to underscore the importance of ensuring that, whenever acts of sabotage of that nature take place, it is crucial that the perpetrators be held to account. We believe that when such incidents occur, it is imperative to investigate thoroughly and take appropriate legal actions. Accountability contributes to reducing mistrust. It ensures that justice is served. Furthermore, it discourages future acts of sabotage against critical civilian infrastructure. It is well known that the protection of civilian infrastructure is one of the foundational pillars of international law and of international humanitarian law. It must be scrupulously observed and upheld by all and at all times. We also hold that view guided by many legal instruments, by resolution 2341 (2017), which aims to protect critical infrastructure against terrorist acts, and by other relevant international instruments. Large swaths of the modern global economy and the backbone of modern daily life largely depend on infrastructure that crosses different countries, different continents and different jurisdictions. It ensures the provision of essential services and resources. We therefore believe that finding answers regarding this grave act of sabotage is of paramount importance.

I want to take note of the introductions by Assistant Secretary-General Jenča and Ms. Niyazberdiyeva. I also listened very carefully and with interest to the remarks made by Mr. Larry Johnson. More than a year and a half has passed since the targeting by as yet unidentified actors of the Nord Stream 1 and 2 gas pipelines, which link the Russian Federation and Germany through the Baltic Sea. As concluded by the investigations carried out by the judicial authorities of Sweden and Denmark, we now know that explosions on and damage to those pipelines were caused by deliberate sabotage. That deliberate incident is a source of deep concern for Algeria for many reasons. First, the physical destruction of critical energy infrastructure is unacceptable, and it constitutes a serious act with serious consequences that constitute a threat to international peace and security. Secondly, for Algeria, the security of energy infrastructure is essential. My country is connected to and supplies Europe via three gas pipelines that are vital for millions of persons, both in Europe and in Algeria. Thirdly, my country intends also, in cooperation with Nigeria, to engage in the construction of a new and long-awaited trans-Saharan gas pipeline between the two countries. Against that backdrop, and in order to prevent such attacks from occurring in the future, I would like to underline the following points. First, Algeria takes note of the information provided to the Security Council by Sweden, Denmark, and Germany about their national investigations. In that regard, I would like to express our support for the ongoing German investigations and for any future international effort, particularly under the auspices of the United Nations, which could shed some light on those attacks. That incident cannot be left to be investigated by historians or journalists. It is of the utmost importance to ascertain, as has been proposed by Mr. Johnson, the actual facts surrounding these acts, including their perpetrators and motive. The perpetrators of those acts, the deliberate nature of which has been confirmed, cannot go unpunished. I concur with Mr. Johnson about the lack of curiosity of important organizations dealing with security in that region. I concur with his recommendation to follow the money invested in the incident. Protecting cross-border critical energy infrastructure with increasing interdependencies between countries is paramount to ensure the security and safety of energy generation, transmission and distribution. Overall, there is no doubt that the strategic importance of cross-border infrastructure exposes it to a growing number, and a wider variety, of threats and vulnerabilities that raise new security concerns. Therefore, it is crucial to strengthen regional and international cooperation, as has been said by my colleague from Mozambique, to ensure prevention, protection, mitigation, preparedness and thorough investigation in any case of attack against such critical energy infrastructure.

I thank Assistant Secretary-General Miroslav Jenča and Ms. Oguljeren Niyazberdiyeva for their briefings and note the contribution of Mr. Johnson to our discussion today. At the outset, I wish to place on record Guyana’s strong condemnation of all attacks on critical infrastructure. From all indications, the rupturing of the Nord Stream twin pipelines two years ago was carried out deliberately, with powerful explosives. We note that while the pipelines were reportedly not operational at the time, the explosions caused the leakage of methane gas, which posed toxicological and ecological risks to marine life in the Baltic Sea. Also of concern is the fact that explosions occurred within 20 km of a designated chemical munitions dumpsite and could have caused even greater damage to the marine ecosystem. Guyana condemns those attacks and commends the proactive response of the neighbouring Baltic States in investigating the incident. We thank them for keeping the United Nations apprised of the progress of their respective investigations and note that two countries have since discontinued their probe. We have also noted that an investigation by Germany is still under way and look forward to receiving its findings. We hope that the perpetrators of that illegal act will soon be found and held accountable.

I would also like to thank Assistant Secretary-General Jenča and Ms. Niyazberdiyeva for their briefings and insight. I also take note of the statement by Mr. Johnson. Critical civilian infrastructure needs to be protected at all times, whether it be a hospital in Gaza, a power plant in Ukraine or pipelines in the Baltic Sea. Slovenia is concerned about the several instances of damage done to underwater infrastructure that have occurred in recent times, including the submarine communication cables cut in the Red Sea in early March and the damage done to the Baltic-connector gas pipeline last October. Slovenia condemns the act of sabotage directed against the Nord Stream pipelines in September 2022. We are especially concerned about the environmental impact of the incident, as it appears to have caused the single largest discharge of methane ever recorded. Slovenia appreciates the transparency of the countries investigating the act of sabotage and notes that Denmark and Sweden have concluded their national investigations on the incident in line with the fundamental principle of the rule of law. At the same time, we note that the investigative efforts of German authorities are ongoing. We trust that Germany and its investigators will continue to invest all their efforts in a comprehensive and impartial investigation of the circumstances of the incident and will get to the bottom of the issue. Slovenia remains ready to support Council action in relation to the security of underwater infrastructure, including the Nord Stream pipelines. We will support any initiative that is in line with the principle of the rule of law and support ongoing investigations.

I thank Assistant Secretary- General Jenča, Ms. Niyazberdiyeva and the other briefer for their briefings. It goes without saying that energy serves as a fundamental pillar of modern life and the steady supply of natural gas is essential. Actions that jeopardize crucial infrastructure present a substantial risk to numerous peoples and societies. Japan reiterates its deep concern about the incident involving the Nord Stream pipelines and the long-term damage and risk to the marine environment. The Security Council bears the responsibility of addressing issues affecting international peace and security. In order to fulfil such a function, the Council needs to have facts before it. We take note of the conclusion of the investigations conducted by Denmark and Sweden. We should not start speculating without any objective information. In that regard, we strongly hope that the ongoing national investigation by Germany will be completed as soon as possible and that the results will be provided to the Security Council immediately thereafter.

Russia has once again called for a meeting on Nord Stream, although there have been no developments since the last consultation we held on the subject, on 14 March. We rightfully question Russia’s zeal regarding the file and its deep concern with regard to the attack on that energy infrastructure. I remind members that at the moment Russia is systematically targeting Ukrainian infrastructure and damaging it terribly. During the most recent strikes, Russia has destroyed or damaged seven thermal power plants, three combined heat and power plants, two hydroelectric power plants and 17 electricity substations. The situation has particularly deteriorated in Kharkiv, the country’s second largest city with 1.3 million inhabitants. It is clear that Russia is attempting to distract the Council and the international community. Our assessment of the explosions that damaged the Nord Stream 1 and 2 pipelines in September 2022 remains the same: those were serious events, and they must be taken seriously. Investigations were launched by Germany, Denmark and Sweden. We have never had any reason to doubt the seriousness of those procedures. Those countries have also regularly reported to the Security Council, in letters dated 29 September 2022 (S/2022/725), 21 February 2023 (S/2023/126), 10 July 2023 (S/2023/517), and 7 and 26 February 2024 (S/2024/149 and S/2024/189). I would like to thank them for the letter addressed today to the President of the Council, which details their most recent exchanges with the Russian Federation. After conducting thorough and complex investigations, including a complete examination of the site of the explosions, the Swedish and Danish prosecutors decided to close their investigations on 7 and 26 February respectively, on the grounds that they had no jurisdiction. The investigations indeed established that the sabotage was not directed against Swedish or Danish interests. As the explosions occurred in international waters, the Swedish and Danish courts had no grounds for further investigation. The German justice system, in which we have full confidence, is continuing its investigation. It is imperative that the investigation be completed, without political interference and without prejudging its outcome. It may be useful to remind Russia once again that the conduct of the national investigations  — the two concluded investigations and the current one  — is in accordance with the fundamental principles of the rule of law. The German, Swedish and Danish judicial authorities are independent. France regrets that Russia has not amended its draft presidential statement, despite the convergent amendments submitted by a large number of Council members. The nature of the qualification used requires the presence of certain facts that have not been established. The invitation of the United Nations Office of Counter-Terrorism to this meeting also attests to the fact that Russia is pre-empting the outcome of the investigation and flouting the mandate of United Nations institutions.

Let me begin by expressing my appreciation to Assistant Secretary-General Jenča and Ms. Niyazberdiyeva for their respective briefings. I also take note of the comments made by Mr. Johnson. As today’s briefings contained no major developments since our most recent meeting on the September 2022 Nord Stream incident (see S/PV.9424), my delegation would like to deliver our principled position on this matter. First, the Republic of Korea expresses its firm opposition to any sabotage or indiscriminate attacks against critical infrastructure that could disrupt energy supply chains or other essential services for ordinary people. In that regard, we stress the importance of holding all perpetrators of such acts accountable so as to prevent any similar acts from occurring in future. Secondly, we fully support the national investigations by Denmark, Sweden, and Germany into the deliberate sabotage of the Nord Stream 1 and 2 pipelines, conducted in close international cooperation. We also welcome the information related to this case that was provided to the Security Council by those countries. In the same vein, we respect the recent decisions of the Swedish and Danish authorities to conclude their investigations based on their findings and in accordance with relevant domestic laws. Furthermore, we express our full confidence that the investigation by the German authorities will be conducted in an independent and impartial manner, and we look forward to receiving further information upon its conclusion. Thirdly, my delegation emphasizes that any politicization or speculation on this case is detrimental to revealing the truth and holding perpetrators accountable. We are concerned that the international community has been witnessing continuous accusations, in the absence of concrete evidence. In that connection, the Republic of Korea underlines that it is vital for the Security Council, at this moment, to lend its unwavering support to the ongoing investigation without prejudging its conclusion.

I would also like to thank the Assistant Secretary-General and the Chief of the Office of the Under-Secretary-General for the United Nations Office of Counter-Terrorism for their briefings today. Let me begin by once again condemning the acts of sabotage against the Nord Stream pipelines and underscoring the need for accountability. But let us all be clear: this meeting, like the previous one (see S/PV.9424) and the one before that (see S/PV.9373), are not about accountability. Russia has repeatedly called meetings on this topic to spread disinformation, cast aspersions and discredit ongoing national investigations. It is hard to keep up with Russia’s latest accusations, but one thing remains the same: a victimization narrative. We welcome the reporting to the Council from Sweden and Denmark on the conclusions of their respective national investigations and note Germany’s ongoing investigation. As we have said many times before, those competent national investigations should be allowed to complete their work and to do so without external interference. We will maintain confidence in the independence and rigour of Germany’s investigation and strongly object to attempts to get ahead of or prejudice those efforts. Russia’s claims of noble intentions, the pursuit of justice and need to protect critical infrastructure are as hollow as they are disingenuous. In the same breath, Russia feigns concern about the sabotage of critical infrastructure it values, while wreaking havoc against Ukraine’s cities and targeting its critical infrastructure. And while Russia feigns interest in fact-finding missions and independent investigations, it routinely denies investigations of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights access to Ukrainian territory temporarily occupied by Russia. Russia claims to want the truth, accountability and facts and then vetoed draft resolution S/2024/255, on the mandate renewal of an independent United Nations investigative mechanism like the Panel of Experts of the Committee established pursuant to resolution 1718 (2006), concerning the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. The hypocrisy is as galling as it is predictable.

I wish to thank the three briefers for their briefings. It has been more than 18 months since the Nord Stream pipeline explosions. It is regrettable that no key conclusion has been reached on this matter. China notes that, as major parties to the incident and each having conducted individual country-led investigations for more than a year, Sweden and Denmark, one after the other, announced in February the termination of their investigations. The country-led investigations of the two countries did not disclose substantive information, reveal concrete progress or draw clear conclusions, sparking more speculation and misgivings in the international community. The Nord Stream pipeline explosions were a serious incident that undermined transnational energy infrastructure. Since the explosions, the Council has considered the issue on many occasions, and many Council members, including China, have been calling for an objective, impartial and professional investigation to uncover the truth as soon as possible and bring the perpetrators to justice in order to prevent the recurrence of similar incidents. In the wake of the incident, members of the Council debated whether to conduct an international or a country-led investigation. At that time, some members strongly advocated that Sweden, Denmark and Germany be given the trust and the time to conduct their own country-led investigations. However, after more than a year of investigations, no truth has been established and only scant information revealed. Given the current state of affairs, one cannot help but suspect a hidden agenda behind opposition to an international investigation and lament the potential cover-up and substantial loss of compelling evidence. There is an old Chinese saying: it is never too late to mend the fold after the sheep is lost. We reiterate our call for the early launch of a United Nations-led international investigation to bring the truth to light and give it a chance to be heard in order to provide closure for the international community. Russia is one of the main parties to the Nord Stream pipeline explosions. We call on the countries concerned to actively communicate and cooperate with Russia in the joint investigation. It is important to avoid double standards on this issue within the international community and, especially, within the Council. Russia recently circulated a draft presidential statement on the Nord Stream pipeline explosions that objectively describes the situation and calls on the parties concerned to cooperate in the investigation. Those elements are clear and concise, meet the expectation of the international community and should be the consensus of the Council. We hope that an early agreement on the draft presidential statement can be secured, so that the Council can speak out on the issue as soon as possible.

I am grateful for the information provided by the briefers. Since September 2022, Ecuador has expressed its concern about the explosions that affected the Nord Stream 1 and 2 gas pipelines in the Baltic Sea. The investigation conducted by Denmark determined that the destruction of the pipelines was the result of deliberate sabotage and that there are not sufficient grounds to continue with a criminal prosecution within its jurisdiction. Similarly, Sweden discontinued its investigation, noting the absence of grounds for further investigation. For Ecuador, a call for maximum caution and restraint is not enough, since, in a context of growing geopolitical tension, that has become a duty for all States. While we await the outcome of the national investigations, all parties involved should cooperate. That and other sensitive issues must be addressed in a spirit of dialogue and good faith. Ecuador will continue to be guided by official information, including that provided by Under- Secretary-General Rosemary DiCarlo, who has called for avoiding disruptive actions that could affect or inhibit the search for the truth. Ecuador maintains that there is no justification for attacks against essential civilian infrastructure, including those in the energy sector. The incident not only jeopardized the economic and energy security of Europe, but also compromised the safety of maritime and air navigation and posed a serious environmental threat resulting from the release hundreds of millions of cubic meters of gas into the atmosphere. In view of the aforementioned, my country reiterates its condemnation of those acts and hopes that the investigations in Germany will come to a prompt conclusion. Accountability must be guaranteed, and it must not be delayed.

I thank you, Mr. President, for convening this meeting. I also wish to thank the three briefers for their contributions. We note that the convening of this meeting, under this agenda item, comes at a time when there is a collective and urgent call for the building of trust and unity on the Council. We therefore view the convening of this meeting as an opportunity for the Council to reaffirm respect for the obligations arising from the Charter of the United Nations and the principles of international law, in particular international humanitarian law. Recalling the incidents surrounding the reported sabotage of the Nord Stream gas pipeline in the Baltic Sea in September 2022, Sierra Leone reiterates the international humanitarian law principle of the protection of civilians and civilian objects. Beyond what lies within the confines of armed conflicts, international law prohibits conduct that risks destruction of extraterritorial properties of States. We therefore strongly condemn acts of sabotage of civilian and critical infrastructure. With regard to the Nord Stream incident, we note that investigations were conducted by Denmark and Sweden, and those investigations closed in February without any attribution to a responsible party, as it was determined there was not enough grounds for a criminal case. We further note that the investigation by Germany is still ongoing. In that regard, we believe that a fact-based, credible, inclusive and transparent process with an impartial outcome will provide much- needed clarity on the incident to ensure accountability. Increasingly, we are discovering the interconnectedness and interdependence of our global system. That is reflected in the global economic, humanitarian and environmental effects of incidents and actions, even if considered to be regional in context, underscoring more than ever, the pivotal role of a strengthened multilateral system, which bolsters diplomacy, cooperation and respect for the rule of law. Therefore, Sierra Leone urges member States to continue to build trust, and in the instant case, calls for further proceeding on the basis of globally accepted and established practices for fact-finding investigations and inquiries, as well as confidence in the institutions and systems that conduct and support them. Sierra Leone is concerned about the escalation of attacks on energy installations, civilian and other critical infrastructure in various ongoing conflicts. We therefore urge the parties to exercise restraint and comply with international law. As appropriate, we support the call for independent, impartial and transparent investigations to establish the facts, attribute responsibility and ensure accountability. In conclusion, therefore, Sierra Leone calls for a swift conclusion of the ongoing national investigations relating to the Nord Stream gas pipeline in a manner that will build further trust. We call for a constructive and cooperative path based on law.

I would like to thank the Assistant Secretary-General, Miroslav Jenča, and the Chief of the Office of the Under-Secretary-General for their briefings. I take note of Mr. Larry Johnson’s statement. We have spoken about this subject several times in the past. Allow me, however, to repeat the main points made in our previous statements. Switzerland remains concerned about the alleged acts of sabotage against the Nord Stream 1 and 2 pipelines in September 2022, which led to considerable gas leaks. Switzerland condemns all acts of sabotage targeting critical infrastructure, including energy infrastructure. Such acts can have damaging consequences for the supply of gas to the population, the economy and the environment. We welcome the fact that information on the investigations carried out by Denmark, Germany and Sweden has been provided on a regular basis. We note that the national investigation in Germany is ongoing, and we await its conclusion. We have in fact received a request from the Russian Federation in connection with the International Convention for the Suppression of Terrorist Bombings and the International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism, and we have replied in writing that the request is under consideration.

I can be quick because we have had this debate many times in the Chamber before. As we have said several times, the United Kingdom unequivocally condemns acts of sabotage on critical national infrastructure. And we take the sabotage of the Nord Stream pipelines extremely seriously. I would like to make three quick points about how the Council can best address this. First, we continue to believe that the best way to establish what happened and who was responsible is for the Council members to support Germany’s ongoing national investigation. We recognize that the investigation will take time, owing to its complexity, and we have every confidence that it is being conducted with impartiality, integrity, transparency and in line with the rule of law. We do not believe that it is a good use of Council members’ time for the Security Council to try to prejudge the outcome of the investigation, dictate how the investigation is conducted or seek to politicize the issue. And we should avoid engaging in baseless and unhelpful speculation. Secondly, I would like to take this opportunity to express our appreciation to all those involved in the national investigations conducted by Denmark and Sweden. We welcome the updates sent to the Council in February (S/2024/149 and S/2024/189) outlining their findings, and we respect the decisions to conclude their investigations. And thirdly, we note that Russia has consistently called Council meetings on this and vocally condemned attacks on critical national infrastructure. Yet Russia is, at the same time, deliberately and systematically targeting Ukraine’s energy system and attacking its critical infrastructure. Just this month, as one example, Russia launched 82 missiles and drones destroying the Trypilska thermal power plant. Trypilska was one of Ukraine’s largest power-generating facilities and a critical energy asset for the Kyiv, Cherkasy and Zhytomyr oblasts. Therefore, we urge Russia to translate its apparent concern for protecting critical infrastructure into action by immediately ceasing such attacks and ending its illegal war of aggression in Ukraine.

I shall now make a statement in my capacity as the representative of Malta. I thank Assistant Secretary-General Jenča and Ms. Niyazberdiyeva for their briefings. I also thank Mr. Johnson for sharing his views. Malta has repeatedly expressed condemnation and concern for the act of sabotage against the Nord Stream gas pipelines, as well as any other hostile act against civilian infrastructure. Those acts posed a threat to energy security in Europe and had grave environmental consequences. However, given the lack of new relevant information, we do not understand the need for another Council meeting at this stage. The German national investigations are still ongoing and need time to process all the information handed over by the Swedish and Danish authorities. We have full confidence that they are being conducted in a professional and impartial manner, in line with the fundamental principles of international law. In that regard, the Council should refrain from any action that could, in any way, seek to impose timelines, undermine their proceedings or prejudge their results. To that end, introducing further investigations at this time would be counterproductive. The same is true for the Danish and Swedish investigations, which both concluded that there were no grounds to proceed. The Danish authorities confirmed the early findings that the explosions of the two gas pipelines constituted “a deliberate act of sabotage”. However, as the incident occurred outside of Denmark’s territorial waters, they determined a lack of sufficient grounds to pursue a criminal case in the country. Malta has always engaged constructively on this file, and we will continue to do so. At the same time, any initiative by the Council must be rooted in full respect for the ongoing national investigations and must not risk delegitimizing them. I now resume my functions as President of the Council. The representative of the Russian Federation has asked for the floor to make a further statement.

The narrative of our Western partners and the statements that we heard today did not surprise us. To be frank, we did not expect anything less from them. But I would like to draw attention to the fact that many of them linked the conflict and the developments in Ukraine to the damage to the Nord Stream pipeline. I would like those countries to answer the question: do they really believe that there is a link between the two events? The answer to that question will be very revealing in terms of understanding what happened with Nord Stream.

The representative of the United Kingdom has asked for the floor to make a further statement.

I will be brief. Allow me to answer that question. I think that it is clear from my statement at least that we did not link the Nord Stream attack to anything to do with Ukraine. This is a question of consistency in Russia’s approach to attacks on critical infrastructure, and we merely pointed out that it is hypocritical of Russia to spend so much time drawing the Security Council’s attention to one act of sabotage on national infrastructure, while at the same time it is deliberately and systematically conducting its own attacks on national infrastructure in Ukraine. It is therefore a question of consistency and coherence in Russia’s approach, not a question of linkage between the two issues.

The representative of the Russian Federation has asked for the floor to make a further statement.

We listened to the response of our colleague from the United Kingdom. He spoke about consistency. I would like to remind him that Nord Stream is a piece of international gas transit infrastructure, to which the provisions of the International Convention for the Suppression of Terrorist Bombings apply. That is what we are discussing here today, not what the Western delegations referred to in their statements.