Breaking news today: Ukrainians blew up Northstream 2. Not quite, „pro-Ukrainian groups“ is what the ARD Tagesschau says and therefore a chronology ; After Western media claimed that Putin blew up NS to blame the US , for raisning oil and gas prices to fill his war chest and launch the energy war against Europe, the Russian Ministry of Defense under Shoigu claimed that Russia had clear evidence that it was the British. The USA had always been under suspicion, but up until then the only evidence was to rely on the Polish Foreign Ministers tweeting „Thank you, USA“. VIctorias Nuland’s statement before a hearing of the US Congress that NS should be „ended one way or the other“. or a comment by Biden to Scholz that NS must come to an end. These accusations were apparently corroborated by an article by Seymour Hersh, who, citing 1 anonymous source, claimed that Biden personally ordered the NS demolition.
It cannot be ruled out that Biden and the USA bombed their European and above all German allies into transatlantic happiness, just as little as the variant that Putn did that. What one or the other claims is quite interchangeable. But beyond the absolute truth content, which nobody will research and answer, it is still more decisive, even if it should have been the USA or Putin, how the diplomatic narrative and the resulting negotiation are offered as a result. Whether it is a state or a group, there is a very important difference, be it in terms of responsibility, be it in the direction of the resulting mega-messages, narratives and offers for negotiations.
The Russian narrtive: So first it were the British, then after Seymour Hers´s blog article the USA and Biden, now the latest breaking news from a research team fromARD, Zeit and WDR: It was Ukraine. But not the pig Selensky. Admittedly not the Ukraine, but then again „pro-Ukrainian groups“. Not Ukraine, not the state, but” pro-Ukrainian groups”(ARD/ ntv) and not the Nazi pig Selensky . But pro-Ukrainian groups without Ukrainian state participation? Who could be other “pro- Ukrainian groups”? The Baltics, the Poles, pro-Ukrainian underwater guerrillas who had such logistics and precision and technology (from where?) and without government support? Dream on Especially in one of the best guarded waters and without ships or submarines? Even stupids don´t believes that. No one asks: Where did ARD, WDR and its so-called investigative pool with the Zeit get these sources and information from? What do they say about it? What is verifiable? Die Zeit, like the SZ, has been enjoying at least since its transatlantic alignment under Josse Joffe, who always boasted of his good old fellow contacts with Brzezinski and personally introduced him in 2000 at the Literature House in Munich during his book reading „Chessboard“ and then immediately with Giovanni De Lorenzo ZEIT aligned the SZ and the Zeit transatlantically, among transatlantics the highest credibility and Joffe made the SZ and the Zeit into two most transatlantic media that could hardly be surpassed, which was also discussed in the ZDF Anstalt, which is why Josse Joffe sued the Anstalt, but lost, because just enough transatlantic networks could be located verifiably. Therefore, the Zeit as a source has a rather high authority, also among and especially among transatlanticists.And hardly in Putin troll suspicion.
Despite everything, one has to ask: Who are the sources? What are the evidences that you can bring without outing and revealing the sources? What does “pro-Ukrainian groups” mean if not states? Anyway, the meta-message is: It wasn’t Putin, it was someone from the West, „pro-Ukrainian groups“, albeit not states. Not the USA, not the Birtish, no states, just groups and not Putin or pro-Russian groups or little green men. However, it may also mean that after Selensky had to withdraw in Bachmuth, had toppled his general, the offensive failed, but he still wanted to conquer the whole of Ukraine and needed more and more weapon systems for this, that some elite forces in the West, whether USA or Germany have come to the conclusion that no more weapons should be supplied and that peace negotiations should be started as soon as possible, and therefore such revelations about the perpetrators of „pro-Ukrainian groups“ being made to the world according to the slogan: The Ukrainians are no angels either, they want to draw us into the war, which is why there must be an end to arms deliveries and war. Be it the Ukrainian missile over Poland that they wanted to blame the Russians on, be it “pro-Ukrainian groups” who blew up NS, yes what happens when you deliver fighter jets and pro- Ukrainian groups already perform sabotage attacks on Russian territory?
In any case, it seems to be a diplomatic mega-message that offers negotiation options: no states involved, Putin innocent, the USA and GB, yes maybe Ukraine and Selnesky too not i nvolved, insofar as he responds to the demands of other pro-Ukrainian states, otherwise „pro-Ukrainian groups“ , who want to play us off against each other, so the best thing is an understanding between all sides who are not involved, preferably between the USA and Russia, because the Ukrainians can no longer be trusted completely, if they can´t controll the „pro- Ukrainian groups or from the Russian side: You cannot trust the Ukrainians, if they controll the „pro-Ukrainian groups“. But let’s wait and see how long these mega-symbolic offers bring real effects.
But what is a German chancellor supposed to say when the SZ is much more advanced than the government’s alibi investigation committee? Should he say: The USA declared economic war on us and led an attack against Germany by blowing up the pipeline and causing us enormous costs and wanted to make us dependent on their LNG, which is why we, like Wagenknecht and Lafontaine, have to leave NATO, cancel all transatlantic friendship with the US and unite with Russia, lift sanctions, get cheap oil and gas, and stop supplying weapons to Ukraine? Or would transatlanticists not rather say: Thank you USA for finally separating us from the Russian umbilical cord, to make us independent for a change and to switch to the clear liberal camp – West in contrast to intermediate neutral positions and Eurasian tendencies with China and Russia like under Schröder and Merkel? Can the West now regain strength? Well, with „pro-Ukrainian groups“ you don’t put a state and its leaders on trial, but leave a lot of diplomatic leeway, even though the meta-message is: It wasn’t Putin. Or was it Putin? Germany’s defense minister, Pistorius, has now declared that the matter should be investigated with patience and not be misled by hasty sensational reports. It would be possible that this is a false flag operation by the Russians, in order to lay the wrong trail, to discredit the Ukrainians and now, in the case of Bachmuth, to turn off the Western weapons deliveries.