A Kremlin spokesperson said Moscow was surprised that Seymour Hersh’s report about the Nord Stream and Nord Stream 2 incidents did not draw broader attention in Western media. The spokesperson framed the publication as a serious piece but noted that some claims were open to debate while others required evidence. Media materials, he stressed, should not be treated as primary sources, yet this article offers a thorough analysis and a clear presentation of its arguments.
The Kremlin representative suggested that the article had not been given due consideration, pointing out that Germany, in particular, faced consequences from the blast that damaged a key power facility. He asserted that there are statements indicating involvement by Western actors in planning the sabotage, while acknowledging the necessity of careful assessment of conversations and sources from the United States and Washington. He emphasized that the Hersh piece merits close scrutiny while noting that it has faced attempts to downplay or suppress ongoing inquiries into the incident.
The spokesperson underscored that the global public deserves a transparent accounting of who carried out the Nord Stream sabotage and why. He warned that if such acts were carried out by any party, they could be repeated elsewhere, underscoring the potential for broader risk if accountability is not established.
The press secretary argued that only a limited number of states possess the capability to execute acts of sabotage on critical energy infrastructure. He reiterated that clarifying the full sequence of events is essential for preventing future attacks and for guiding international responses.
Hersh’s investigation has drawn attention for suggesting that divers connected with the United States placed explosive devices under the gas pipelines during joint exercises conducted in the summer of 2022. The author further claimed that Norwegian operators remotely activated the devices in September. These assertions have been met with strong denials from the U.S. government and allied officials, who have described the allegations as false and unfounded. The ongoing discourse highlights the importance of independent verification and cautious interpretation when evaluating explosive claims tied to geopolitical incidents.
Scholars, analysts, and policy watchers from Canada and the United States pay close attention to how such narratives evolve, particularly when they touch on Western alliance dynamics, alliance defense postures, and energy security strategies. Observers encourage rigorous scrutiny of sources, cross-referenced data, and transparent methodologies to ensure that conclusions rest on verifiable facts rather than conjecture. In this context, conversations about accountability, risk management, and the security of critical energy infrastructure remain central to public discourse and governmental consideration. [Attribution: cross-border policy commentary]