Remarks to the Press by First Deputy Permanent Representative Dmitry Polyanskiy following Security Council's AOB discussion of the sabotage at Nord Stream pipelines
Ambassador Polyanskiy: We have raised under AOB (“any other business”) the question of investigation of the sabotage of Nord Stream-1 and Nord Stream-2. We drew attention of our colleagues in the Security Council to the fact that the so-called national investigations conducted by Sweden, Germany and Denmark are not moving forward. In fact, what we see is just moving around in circles, some kind of pretension that Russia is aware of what is happening, which is totally false. You know that we distributed a document in the Security Council – the compilation of letters that we exchanged with the authorities of Germany, Sweden and Denmark. There were also certain awkward acknowledgments, notably by Swedish Prosecutor General that Russia is not aware of any details of the investigation. And that falls in the line of what we claim in the Security Council.
We stressed that this situation is absolutely intolerable for my country, that my country will do its best to pursue this cause. We will seek an international investigation and a punishment for those who are behind this crime. It is inadmissible that perpetrators of such a heinous crime, which directly affects international peace and security, are not yet identified and prosecuted. In a nutshell, that was what we said during the consultations.
Q: You said you will seek an international investigation. Does that mean you are planning to put forward a UN resolution to do this? How will you do that?
A: We recall the recent vote in the Security Council when twelve of our colleagues abstained. So we are now thinking about how we would pursue this cause. Nothing is excluded in this regard. We just took note of the fact that during the deliberations in the Security Council there was a total unanimity that the national investigations (which were portrayed as something that would bring about the truth about what happened) should be accelerated and that the Security Council should be briefed about it. It has not happened after three months. What we see is only deliberate attempts to mislead the investigation. There are certain versions that I do not even want to comment on because each of them is more absurd than the previous one. It is absolutely clear that there is a state actor behind this sabotage and all the serious experts I think are unanimous about this.
Q: As you just mentioned, previously you have tried at the Security Council. What other options do you have for trying to get an international investigation?
A: One of the options I used today. We just continue to raise this issue in the Security Council and continue to say that we are not satisfied. It implies that we have certain other ways to deal with the situation and certain options in our pocket.
Q: The United States and other NATO member states are considering some kind of agreement and proposal similar to the Israeli model with Ukraine. What are your thoughts on that? And if that happens, would you think that NATO member states are a party to the war?
A: It is very difficult and maybe inappropriate for me to comment on what is happening between NATO countries and its puppet Ukraine. I think they have enough channels to do it themselves.
Q: Recently there was an explosion on the [Kakhovka] dam and Ukraine accused Russia. Now, could it be a wise proposal to say the UN investigation should be done for both at the same time?
A: I do not think we are against any investigations that would lead to establishing the truth, especially when the Nord Stream pipeline is concerned.
As for the Kakhovka situation, it is totally different and there is a lot of evidence which is very difficult to deny, pointing to the Ukrainian responsibility. With the pace of day, this evidence only multiplies. It is absolutely clear right now that it was profitable for Ukraine to do this act of sabotage in the interests of the so-called counter offensive. I do not think that there is a serious need for any investigation in this regard at this point.
Q: So you are actually saying that you will be okay with an investigation about what happened at the dam.
A: I am not saying that we will be okay with putting the two events at the same level and saying that the investigations of both of them are as necessary as the other one. I would say that as for the Nord Stream, it is absolutely clear that this is an act of international sabotage that happened in international waters. There are a lot of factors on the surface that international experts should analyze to come to an obvious conclusion. Obvious to us, but maybe not too obvious to some others.
On Kakhovka, I think this situation is absolutely different. Again, it is very easy to analyze. And I think even the Ukrainians have understood by now that they have made a lot of mistakes by planning and performing this attack. For example, they raised the level of water in the rivers that are above there to make the pressure excessive and to really help this barrier to break. This was clearly proven and is very difficult to refute. I do not think that there is a need for any investigation in this regard. It is absolutely clear to everybody.
Q: The IAEA chief is there [at the ZNPP] now and he has spoken with Russian officials, I think it was in April. What do you think the status is of some kind of a … he is not asking for a safety zone, but some kind of guarantees of safety around the plant?
A: I think he was here in Security Council while I was on vacation and I think he was absolutely clear in formulating the points that he wanted everybody to support. I think that everybody more or less supported what he was saying. And that includes the monitoring of the attacks at the Zaporozhye Nuclear Power Plant, which are, of course, conducted by the Ukrainian side. So we have very high hopes that the IAEA now will have a more open hand in admitting the obvious.
Q: I have one question regarding Nord Stream. We know what the vote was in the Security Council, but since then do you think there have been any countries on the Council that perhaps now would support you? And in general, around the world, do you find that more and more countries are supporting your call for an investigation or not?
A: We feel that more and more countries understand what is happening in terms of this campaign aimed at diverting the attention of international community to certain absurd versions that have absolutely no ground behind them. And this makes a lot of our partners – we feel it – understand clearly that those who are behind this attack are doing everything they can to mislead possible international investigation and to create to create muddy waters for such an investigation to proceed.
Thank you.
