Russia demanded the formation of an international investigation committee. Why do Washington and its allies refuse to internationalize the investigation into the bombing of the Nord Stream gas pipeline?

Washington — The UN Security Council's rejection of Russia's request to form an international commission of inquiry into the bombing of the Nord Stream pipeline did not come as a surprise to a number of experts Al Jazeera Net spoke to.

Russia has called for the formation of an independent international commission of inquiry into the sabotage of the Nord Stream 1 and 2 gas pipelines in September.

Three of the 3 UN Security Council members – Russia, China and Brazil – approved the resolution, while the rest of the council members (America, Britain, France, Albania, Ecuador, Gabon, Ghana, Japan, Malta, Mozambique, Switzerland and the United Arab Emirates) abstained.

Al Jazeera Net spoke with a number of experts about the investigations related to the bombing, and Washington's position on them, in light of the accusations launched by the American journalist Seymour Hersh, and claims the responsibility of American intelligence for the bombing.

Who blew the pipeline?

Robert Pearson, professor of international relations at the famous military academy "West Point", and Matthew Wallen, CEO of the American Security Project (a think tank focused on military affairs) agreed in their interview with Al Jazeera Net that it is not possible to predict knowing who is behind the bombing in light of the scarcity of available information.

David DeRoches, a former Pentagon official and lecturer at the National Defense College in Washington, said that there are several parties that have motives and gains from this bombing, noting that Russia is among them, as it wanted to punish the West and cause an energy crisis in the winter of 2022 in Western Europe.

He said it was possible that countries close to the Russian line that did not have good relations with Moscow, such as Ukraine or Poland, and perhaps one NATO member who was concerned about the "foolish German theory" that trade with Russia would improve Russian behavior.

It could be said that it was the United States that did this.

Steve Paifer, an expert on European affairs and disarmament at the Brookings Institution, said: "We don't yet know who is responsible for the destruction of the Nord Stream gas pipeline. I still think the Russians may have done it to blame Ukraine."

He said the destruction of the pipelines had cut off gas flow to Europe while allowing Russia's Gazprom to invoke force majeure to avoid having to pay fines for failing to meet its gas delivery obligations. Moreover, the same seems to have happened in 2009, when Gazprom wanted to exit a contract with Turkmenistan without paying the penalty terms.

Security Council rejects Russian request for investigation into Nord Stream bombing (Reuters)

Why does Washington reject an independent investigation?

Asked why the U.S. has refused to conduct independent international investigations, Robert Pearson noted that the United States supports ongoing investigations into the explosions currently being conducted by Sweden, Denmark and Germany.

It is inaccurate to say that Washington refuses to allow an independent investigation, he said, noting that the U.S. mission to the United Nations has expressed its belief that Russia aims to discredit ongoing investigations and influence the results in a way that supports Russia's predetermined political narrative.

"Given Moscow's long and publicly documented history of political disinformation, I think this is a legitimate concern about the resolution that Russia has submitted to the UN Security Council," he said, noting that the Russian-led investigation would have much less credibility than the one being conducted by one of the above-mentioned European countries.

"The United States is not a pipeline country and is waiting to see the outcome of the European investigation into the explosion," de Roches said, adding that Russia is a country that can conduct its own investigation as well.

Most countries will not consider the Russian investigation credible, he said, adding that the U.S. government likely felt the Security Council investigation would allow both Russia and China to influence the investigation.

And what about writer Seymour Hersh's accusations to the CIA of destroying the pipeline?

In a recent article, US investigative journalist Seymour Hersh pointed out that US Navy divers - with the help of Norway - planted explosives last June, and they were detonated 3 months later, and the administration of President Joe Biden criticized the information, calling it "completely false."

Matthew Whalen said he did not trust Seymour Hersh's account of the incident, especially since many trusted journalists and analysts did not find it credible and pointed out major flaws in his report.

David de Roches agreed, saying, "Seymour Hersh has a long history of investigative journalism, but he is not infallible. He has made serious mistakes in the past, for example stating that Pakistan has held Osama bin Laden imprisoned for nearly 10 years, and Hersh tends to rely heavily on single, anonymous sources, so he can be misled.