UNSC Fails to Adopt Russia-Drafted Resolution Calling for Nord Stream Probe

Explanation of vote by Permanent Representative Vassily Nebenzia after UNSC vote on a draft resolution regarding the acts of sabotage at the Nord Stream pipeline


I am afraid that after this vote the suspicion, who stands behind the sabotage at the Nord Stream, will but increase. Let me briefly remind of very basic facts in this regard. In plain view of the entire world, the United States and its allies did their best to preclude an objective international investigation regarding the blasts at the Nord Stream pipeline in September last year. First Washington make public threats at the highest level that they would blow up the pipe, then they scoffingly rejoiced at the news about the sabotage. In the meantime, mass media generated lots of speculations and very controversial and absurd (to say the least) versions who might have done it. All calls by Russia as an affected side to join the national investigations in Denmark, Germany, and Sweden, were turned down. All our written requests only received formal replies, this you had an opportunity to see with your own eyes. So here is my forecast. These so-called national investigations, where Russia takes no part, can go on for years. May I ask the representative of the United States what was so “predetermined” that he discovered in our draft resolution? You know the saying “a guilty conscience is never at ease”, don’t you? The United States routinely links this resolution to Ukraine, though not a single word about Ukraine was said in the document, and not only there.

When we raised the issue of an objective international investigation, the tactic of our American and European colleagues narrowed down to denying the involvement of the United States on the one hand and preventing a transparent and impartial inquiry into the circumstances of the sabotage on the other. The more evidence testifying to the involvement of Washington and its NATO allies came to surface, the more vocal the Western bloc was getting about alleged inexpediency of an international investigation.

What does this mean? One does not need to be a detective or an analyst to realize that the United States and the allies are covering up the tracks, i.a. by adding more speculations and absurd versions while refusing to comment on the unflattering facts that are revealed. If the United States was interested in establishing the facts and holding the guilty to account, then Washington would act differently.

Colleagues, this vote was a litmus test to show what world each of us is moving toward. Is it a world where international law is upheld and where there is accountability for attacks against international pipeline systems and other infrastructure? Or is it a world where there are states who can do whatever they like, who devise laws for everyone to follow while calling it a “rules-based order”, and who are never held accountable even for most reckless and dangerous actions? Today’s vote confirmed with all certainty that our former Western partners believe they can get away with anything. Also, today we saw a nasty manifestation of Western “silent conspiracy” in the Security Council, which prevents this body from fulfilling its duties.

Of course, we will draw our conclusions. We are convinced that more detailed facts are yet to be discovered, and that everyone who is complicit in the sabotage of the Nord Stream will be identified, as well as all details of this crime. This is inevitable.

Thank you.

Right of reply: 


Before Mr.Hersh published his findings, I cannot recall any Russian officials say that the United States had been guilty of this tragedy. Such speculations started only after the publication by S.Hersh.

I would like to ask my US colleague. How can you comment on the words of his President J.Biden, who said, “We will put an end to these pipes” long before they were really put an end to?

Second reply: 


My question was not about the article by Mr.Hersh that my American colleague has never read, though I strongly recommend that he does. I asked a direct question. How can you comment on the words of your President, who said openly, “We will put an end to Nord Stream”? This question I did not hear an answer to.

Thank you.


Remarks to the press by Permanent Representative Vassily Nebenzia following UNSC vote on a draft resolution regarding the acts of sabotage at the Nord Stream pipeline

Q: Are you surprised with the voting on your resolution?

A: I’m not.

Q: Why?

A: We knew the result, but the negative result is also a result. We expected something like that because it betrays and reveals a few things. As I said, uneasy conscience betrays itself. You heard my dialogue with the representative of the United States who simply couldn’t answer a simple question which I asked. He was accusing us of propaganda and what not, like they always do, they try to shift focus on Ukraine. We were talking about a particular subject – an independent investigation. Our resolution doesn’t contain a single reference to a single country. It just called for an independent investigation because investigations that are being conducted nationally by Sweden, Denmark and Germany do not meet the requirements of an objective one since they simply exclude one of the countries that suffered most from the process, which is namely Russia.

Q: So will Russia try to push the draft a resolution again for a vote?

A: I think that was enough. What has happened today, has revealed their real attitude towards the issue.

Q: Ambassador, the US representative did say it’s great that Russia is concerned about international infrastructure. And he did say, what about the infrastructure in Ukraine? What’s your response to that?

A: When they have nothing to answer, they always shift the focus on another issue. That’s their tactics. We learned it long time ago.

Q: Ambassador, do you expect the meeting on Belarus to be coming up in the next few days?

A: The meeting was requested. We are always ready for whatever meetings, if they are scheduled. Of course, we have a few things to say.

Q: Any special guests during Russian UNSC Presidency next month?

A: We are expecting Minister Lavrov to come for a few meetings.

Q: Which ones?

A: That is being decided, but I mean signature events of our Presidency, which are scheduled closer to the end of the month.

Q: Does he have permission to travel and everything. I mean, because of all of the problems that your delegation had in the past with getting speakers here.

A: You saw him here at the UNGA high level week. It will be fun if he is not allowed to come here for the UNSC Presidency.

Q: What are those signature events?

A: One of our signature events will be dedicated to the multipolarity in the emerging world (that’s not the exact title, but that’s the topic). The other will be an open debate on the Middle East. There is one more event, which is scheduled earlier in April, before the Minister comes, regarding the uncontrolled arms export, proliferation of uncontrolled arms supplies around the world. We are not focusing on any particular country. Of course, certain countries will be focusing on certain areas, but that’s a generic problem, not just the problem of the conflict that you are referring to.

Q: On Minister Lavrov’s visit, when was the last time he was here?

A: High level week, last September.

Q: And does he have to apply for special permission since he’s been named.

A: Look, he’s coming for the UN events. They are obliged to issue visas for such visitors.

Q: Is he looking forward to it?

A: I hope so.

Q: Has the visa been granted yet by the US?

A: You’re asking a wrong person. That’s their obligation. They should grant a visa to the delegation.

Q: How big is his delegation? That’s always the question. Will he do a press conference, hopefully?

A: I think yes. As usual.


Statement by Permanent Representative Vassily Nebenzia at the UNSC Meeting on the Destruction of Nord Stream