Follow us on social

2023-03-07t170001z_2_lynxmpej260py_rtroptp_4_ukraine-crisis-nordstream-mothball-scaled

On NYT Nord Stream theory, German official raises specter of 'false flag'

The timing of a new report suggesting rogue 'pro-Ukrainian group' might be to blame for pipeline blast is questioned today.

Analysis | Europe

Move over Sy Hersh, the White House has its own theory about the sabotage of the Nord Stream pipelines back in September 2022.

But not everyone, at least right now, is buying it — including German officials, who seem completely taken aback by Tuesday’s New York Times report, which said “new intelligence” suggests a “pro-Ukrainian group” might have been behind the sabotage.

In a German Deutsche Welle (DW) report Wednesday morning, German Defence Minister Boris Pistorius “warned against premature accusations of responsibility for the attacks.”

"It may just as well have been a false flag operation staged to blame Ukraine, an option brought up in the media reports as well," Pistorius told German public broadcaster Deutschlandfunk. Meanwhile, German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock “echoed the same caution, saying investigations by the relevant authorities must be concluded first,” saying Wednesday that Berlin would not "jump to conclusions" until the federal prosecution's investigation is concluded.

Meanwhile, other German joint reporting by public broadcasters ARD and SWR and Die Zeit have been conducting their own investigation, which in part fleshes out the information offered by the anonymous sources in the NYT story. According to German paper Taggesshau (translated from German):

Specifically, according to information from the ARD capital studio , "Kontraste", SWR and "ZEIT", the investigators succeeded in identifying the boat that was allegedly used for the secret operation. It is said to be a yacht rented from a company based in Poland, apparently owned by two Ukrainians. According to the investigation, the secret operation at sea was carried out by a team of six people. It is said to have been five men and one woman.

Accordingly, the group consisted of a captain, two divers, two diving assistants and a doctor, who are said to have transported the explosives to the crime scenes and placed them there. The nationality of the perpetrators is apparently unclear. (They) used professionally forged passports, which are said to have been used, among other things, to rent the boat.

According to the investigation, the command set sail from Rostock on September 6, 2022

As with the NYT article, there is no confirmation offered on the nationalities of the alleged saboteurs, or any evidence that President Zelensky or his top officials were aware of the plot. Ukrainian authorities, by the way, have been adamant that their government has no ties to the explosions.

The NYT report comes nearly a month to the day that Sy Hersh published his own explosive theory in an extensively reported piece on its Substack newsletter. In it, he alleges that a small group of expert U.S. Navy divers secretly carried out the explosions on behalf of top Washington officials who wanted to take the pipelines offline after the February 2022 Russian invasion. The story was rejected as complete "fiction" by government officials and roundly ignored by the mainstream media.

Interestingly, the NYT report says "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. But it is possible that the perpetrators received specialized government training in the past." (emphasis mine)

The German news investigation claims the boat that was used in the operation was launched from Rostock, Germany. Hersh's report claims the boat (a minesweeper) carrying the U.S. Navy divers launched from Bornholm Island in Denmark. Moreover, while critics of Hersh's report say no minesweeper by Hersh's description was tracked on publicly available radar on the day in question, the NYT says this:

According to a European lawmaker briefed late last year by his country’s main foreign intelligence service, investigators have been gathering information about an estimated 45 “ghost ships” whose location transponders were not on or were not working when they passed through the area, possibly to cloak their movements.

George Beebe, former CIA officer and now head of Quincy Institute's Grand Strategy program suggested the timing of Tuesday's reports didn't quite pass the smell test.

"It is suspicious to me that suddenly this intelligence comes to light — many months after the fact. It’s odd, and it very conveniently serves as an alternative to Sy Hersh's reporting," he tells me. "One could perhaps explain it but it very much begs the question, where did this come from, and why now?"

Foreign policy analysts and reporters had similar reactions on Tuesday. Jack Murphy, a Special Operations veteran, author, and journalist who in December broke a story about CIA-backed, pro-Ukraine saboteurs operating in Russia, seemed incredulous that if it were a pro-Ukrainian group, the U.S. wouldn't know about it.

"Still scratching my head over this one," he wrote on Twitter. "So, I'm to believe we cracked Russian military comms, have sources in the Kremlin, are 3 steps ahead of them, but... We have "limited visibility" into the decision making process of the Ukrainians, and are frustrated by their renegade ops?"

Others puzzled over the idea that a seemingly rogue group could be responsible for a sophisticated operation that investigators said could likely only be pulled off by a state actor — and only a handful of states at that. While investigations have been ongoing, Russia's culpability — which had been suggested from the get-go by American officials, punditry and media — has been all but written off.

If this is some sort of false flag — traces left to suggest Ukrainian involvement — why?

"The Biden administration seems to be recognizing that the story of the Russians blowing up their own pipeline wasn’t holding any water," said Beebe. 

"This doesn’t mean (the NYT story) is wrong, but it sure does raise questions in my mind as to what is going on here. They didn’t show any evidence to the New York Times reporters, they simply said, ‘we have this new intelligence. Trust us.”


FILE PHOTO: A satellite image shows gas from the Nord Stream pipeline bubbling up in the water following incidents in the Baltic Sea, in this handout picture released September 29, 2022. Roscosmos/Handout via REUTERS
Analysis | Europe
Daniel Noboa, Xi Jinping
Top photo credit: Beijing, China.- In the photos, Chinese President Xi Jinping (right) and his Ecuadorian counterpart, Daniel Noboa (left), during a meeting in the Great Hall of the People, the venue for the main protocol events of the Chinese government on June 26, 2025 (Isaac Castillo/Pool / Latin America News Agency via Reuters Connect)

Why Ecuador went straight to China for relief

Latin America

Marco Rubio is visiting Mexico and Ecuador this week, his third visit as Secretary of State to Latin America.

While his sojourn in Mexico is likely to grab the most headlines given all the attention the Trump administration has devoted to immigration and Mexican drug cartels, the one to Ecuador is primarily designed to “counter malign extra continental actors,” according to a State Department press release.The reference appears to be China, an increasingly important trading and investment partner for Ecuador.

keep readingShow less
US Capitol
Top image credit: Lucky-photographer via shutterstock.com

Why does peace cost a trillion dollars?

Washington Politics

As Congress returns from its summer recess, Washington’s attention is turning towards a possible government shutdown.

While much of the focus will be on a showdown between Senate Democrats and Donald Trump, a subplot is brewing as the House and Senate, led by Republicans but supported by far too many Democrats, fight over how big the Pentagon’s budget should be. The House voted to give Trump his requested trillion dollar budget, while the Senate is demanding $22 billion more.

keep readingShow less
Yemen Ahmed al-Rahawi
Top image credit: Funeral in Sana a for senior Houthi officials killed in Israeli strikes Honor guard hold up a portraits of Houthi government s the Prime Minister Ahmed al-Rahawi and other officials killed in Israeli airstrikes on Thursday, during a funeral ceremony at the Shaab Mosque in Sanaa, Yemen, 01 September 2025. IMAGO/ via REUTERS

Israel playing with fire in Yemen

Middle East

“The war has entered a new phase,” declared Mohammed al-Bukhaiti, a senior official in Yemen’s Ansar Allah movement, after Israeli jets streaked across the Arabian Peninsula to kill the group’s prime minister and a swathe of his cabinet in Yemen’s capital, Sana’a.

The senior official from Ansar Allah, the movement commonly known as the Houthis, was not wrong. The strike, which Israel’s Defense Minister Israel Katz promised was “just the beginning,” signaled a fundamental shift in the cartography of a two-year war of attrition between the region’s most technologically advanced military and its most resilient guerrilla force.

The retaliation was swift, if militarily ineffective: missiles launched towards Israel disintegrated over Saudi Arabia. Internally, a paranoid crackdown ensued on perceived spies. Houthi security forces stormed the offices of the World Food Programme and UNICEF, detaining at least 11 U.N. personnel in a sweep immediately condemned by the U.N. Secretary General.

The catalyst for this confrontation was the war in Gaza, unleashed by Hamas’s October 7 attacks on Israel, which provided the Houthis with the ideological fuel and political opportunity to transform themselves. Seizing the mantle of Palestinian solidarity — a cause their leader, Abdul-Malik al-Houthi, frames as a “sacrifice in the cause of God Almighty ” — they graduated from a menacing regional actor into a global disruptor, launching missiles toward Israel just weeks after Hamas’s attacks and holding one of the world’s most vital shipping lanes hostage.

The chessboard was dangerously rearranged in May, when the Trump administration, eager for an off-ramp from a costly and ineffective air campaign, brokered a surprise truce with the Houthis. Mediated by Oman, the deal was simple: the U.S. would stop bombing Houthi targets, and the Houthis would stop attacking American ships. President Trump, in his characteristic style, claimed the Houthis had “capitulated” while also praising their “bravery.”

keep readingShow less

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.