Remarks to the Press by Permanent Representative Vassily Nebenzia on Nord Stream Sabotage and Other Matters on International Agenda
I came here to brief you on the discussion on the Nord Stream, which we’ve just had in the Security Council. Perhaps you followed it. We heard the same narrative from our Western colleagues that we should not prejudge the German investigation that is effective, and they have no doubt in the effectiveness of the investigation. That's why the Security Council should not engage in this matter before we know the results.
But the problem is that we have no clue what the German investigation is about. We’ve already had the Danish and Swedish investigation officially completed without bringing to light any results (because there were no results). They just had to confess that they confirm it was an act of sabotage, but they didn't have a clue who might have done it.
This is an unpleasant subject for our western colleagues. Today, as one of my colleagues on the Security Council said, we’ve had the most effective meeting on the Council that lasted 45 minutes. All meetings should be like this, but it was 45 minutes because they have nothing to say. They repeated their narrative, which we’ve heard before many times.
I think it was our third attempt to produce some reaction from the Security Council in the form of the PRST. We worked on it in good faith. We made a lot of concessions. We tried to accommodate their concerns as much as we could, but to no avail. Because they are trying to avoid calling a spade a spade. They don’t want to recognize that under the relevant international convention of 1997, it was a deliberate act of terrorism, and are only citing the incompleteness of the investigation that would have proven it.
We heard nothing substantive from our Western colleagues, and we feel like they want to drag on this investigation by Germany indefinitely, so that they cannot say anything definitive, when the facts are on the table. But we will not hesitate to continue putting that subject on the agenda. It is already on the agenda. Because it is obviously a threat to international peace and security. And, of course, we are conducting our own investigation. We'll be demanding that the parties involved, including Germany, share with us the findings that they have not yet shared (and we are not sure that they are going to share them) in any foreseeable time. That's basically what I wanted to tell you about.
Question: Mr. Ambassador, thank you for doing this. Can you tell us why Russia decided to press for a presidential statement before the German investigation is concluded? Have you gotten any indication of when the results of that investigation might be released?
Nebenzia: We decided to push for it before the German investigation is completed because the German investigation may last forever. We may not live up to the time when it is completed. And that's a good excuse. That's a good excuse to sabotage this time any decision or any product of the Security Council, citing the incomplete state of the German investigation.
But one of the things that our Western colleagues object to is recognizing that it was an act of terrorism, because the investigation has not established that. However, the German Chancellor Olaf Scholz himself recognized on September 14 that it was an act of terrorism. But our colleagues, in particular France, – you saw it in the Council today – were defending the effectiveness of the German investigation and was advising not to prejudge it. That is the reason why they refused to call it an act of terrorism. For us it's obvious, it was an act of terrorism, not just sabotage. These pipelines did not blow up by themselves. Of course, there were perpetrators. The way the investigation is being conducted clearly tells us that there is something to hide for them, and that's why they want to drag it on and on and on.
Question: You are saying that you are waiting up for Germany’s investigation and trying to speed it up. Have any Security Council member ever tried to invite Germany to the Security Council meeting to brief on the issue?
Nebenzia: We have. Once, I think initially, all three countries involved (Germany, Denmark, and Sweden) were in the Council, made statements basically about nothing, about the need to investigate and find the truth. Then, when we called them later, they never came, sending letters, basically empty letters, to the President of the Security Council on the continuation of the investigation. Now, Sweden and Denmark are out of the game. We have only Germany left, but they chose not to appear again, referring to their “continuing investigation.”
Question: Just to follow it, did you invite Germany to this particular meeting?
Nebenzia: No, we didn't because it's obviously useless.
Question: Ambassador, I remember last time you said that Russia would probably prepare a draft resolution concerning Nord Stream here, in the Security Council. How is that going now? And do you really expect the Council to give any concrete reaction on this issue?
Nebenzia: We were discussing and negotiating a resolution once. It didn't fly, because of the reasons that I tried to explain. Then, we lowered our ambitions to a presidential statement, which didn't fly either. I wonder what they will do when finally (and hopefully) the investigation is completed and when we offer a product of the Security Council. What will they say then? What reasons will they find to sabotage the product when there are no excuses left?
Question: Thank you, Ambassador. Your French counterpart in his response said that the Russian Federation needed to, in his words, wait patiently for the German report. What is your response to that? And the second question, sir. You're still calling for an independent investigation as well. Is that correct? Where do you foresee that going in the future?
Nebenzia: When my French colleague said it, he never gave us any timeline. We don't know how long we should be patient about that. For days, months, years, decades? For some, it would be preferably decades, but I think that would be a bit excessive. On the international investigation, we didn't refer to it today, but we did refer to it earlier. Today, I think it was Algeria that mentioned the subject. But it is going nowhere, because for the international investigation to happen, there should be an agreement of the parties who are involved and who are requesting an investigation. We offered it in the beginning in the Security Council. The UN said, as usual, that it’ll be prepared if there is a mandate, but there is no mandate for it so far.
Question: Do the Germans give you any indication of how much longer this will take?
Nebenzia: No. We have not received any replies to our requests officially sent to them to keep us abreast and give us information on the ongoing investigation. We have nothing. We send replies through the official channels through our judicial authorities, but replies never came.
Question: Do you think their investigation is credible?
Nebenzia: That's a question which is difficult to answer. So far, we don't have any evidence whether it's credible or not, but we might speculate that it might not be credible.
Question: If you don't mind, Ambassador, as you know, Israel bombed Beirut overnight in a residential area. They said they're targeting one person. What is the Russian Federation's response to this continued aggression on Lebanon?
Nebenzia: Absolutely inadmissible. I mean, they're targeting one person, collaterally killing civilians. The count is already over a thousand. I will not be surprised if it'll be in the thousands shortly. You know that we’ve had a meeting on that issue the other day, and you heard everyone. Luckily, we are the only country (and I‘m not boasting) that can afford to call a spade a spade. I think that many would like to say similar things, but they cannot simply afford it. Let me refer to the meeting convened jointly by a strange alliance, by Iran and Israel, each on its own matter. The rhetoric of our western colleagues at that meeting boiled down to the narrative that Iran is a culprit of all that is happening in the region, as if that happened in a vacuum, as if there were no Gaza, no Lebanon, no Yemen, no Syria, etc. We clearly stated that it should be stopped immediately, that the situation is fraught with regional confrontation, and confrontation is already there. How far it will expand, that's another question. You see these belligerent remarks both by Israel and Iran. I'm sure, we’re sure, and we said it openly in the Council, that Israel dreams to involve the US into the game. So, what awaits us in the future is really worrisome.
Thank you very much.
