KEY TAKEAWAYS:
The blog asserts that the US had prior knowledge of the UK's intentions to destroy the Nord Stream pipelines but chose not to intervene, was unable, or started to cooperate with the perpetrator choosing the position suiting best its own strategy thus coordinating their moves along, synchronizing the UK´s mission plans but hidden in order not to alleviate its ally Germany, France and other EU states.
Would this hypothesis proven correct that the USA was in a position to stop the attack but has deliberately passed the responsibility to its allies or has consciously chosen not to do so could be an issue handled by the international court and it could also seriously upset the Trans-Atlantic alliance.
The author posits that there could be legal accountability for the actions of the US, UK, and Norway regarding this incident and that is also the reason for the media blanket over the case.
Communication channels between the US and Russia, notably the "red phone," are referenced in relation to the events.
It is suggested that the US took steps to de-escalate tensions with Russia in the lead-up to the Nord Stream incident.
The potential for legal actions is explored, including scenarios involving the International Court of Justice and the International Criminal Court.
DATA:
25 Sept 2022 - Meet the Press - National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan, Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.), Sara Fagen, Mike Memoli, Amna Nawaz and Jen Psaki...Globally, the existential threat to democracy is Vladimir Putin, whose decision to invade Ukraine has produced the biggest conflict in Europe since the Second World War. Putin is now threatening to use Russia's nuclear weapons, saying in a televised address, "This is not a bluff." President Biden responded at the United Nations.
CHUCK TODD:
While you were talking, we were able to show some footage of people voting with – under the supervision of armed Russian guards, so just to give folks a taste of what kind of referendum this is. I want to talk about the nuclear threats from Vladimir Putin.There was a report this week that folks in the Biden administration have made it clear, privately, of the severe consequences. Does this mean the red phone is working again? Because at the beginning of this conflict there was a lot of concern that some of the basic communications that we had from military to military, intel to intel, you had a hard time getting your counterparts to return calls. Does this mean the red phone is working again?
JAKE SULLIVAN:
Well, Chuck, we've been careful to protect the timing and the content of the conversations we have with the Russian government, with the Kremlin.But the answer to your question is yes.
We do have the capacity to speak directly at senior levels and to be clear about our messages to them and to receive their messages.
That has happened frequently over the course of the past few months.
It has happened even in just the last few days.
Update:
20/11/2024 - RU: Peskov: "Red phone" between Moscow and Washington is not in use
Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said that the special telephone line, which was established for communication between Moscow and Washington after the Cuban crisis, is currently not in use.
"We have a special secure line for communication between the two presidents - Russia and the USA. Moreover, even for video communication," said Peskov.
Summary (see also other posts) partial result, more research needed:
The USA started to de-escalate before the Nordstream affair happened.
The USA had a knowledge about the UK´s plan to blow up Nordstream pipelines
The USA did not stop the mission
The USA decided to step aside and protect NATO cohesion
This is why Russia later blamed Anglo-Saxons as guilty and not a single state.
Legally:
Legal Accountability and ConsequencesThe UK could be charged under Violation of sovereignty (Act of Aggression, Violation of the United Nations Charter), Sabotage or International Terrorism and/or Environmental damage.
The USA and Norway could be charged under Complicity in Aggression, Failure to prevent, Neglecting duty to act.
International Court of Justice (ICJ):
- State Responsibility: Russia and Nordstream AG hareholders (the victim) could bring a case against States USA, Norway, and the main perpetrator the UK in the ICJ for violations of international law, including aggression and failure to prevent an unlawful act.
United Nations Security Council (UNSC):
- Security Council Action: The UNSC could be called upon to address the situation, potentially leading to sanctions or other measures against the UK, and possibly against other States for their roles.
International Criminal Court (ICC):
- Individual Accountability: Leaders or individuals in the UK who planned and executed the "sabotage" (or the unlawful act) could potentially be prosecuted by the ICC for crimes of aggression or terrorism, depending on the circumstances and evidence.
Because the truth matters.
Please consider supporting my work with a donation.
Every bit helps keep this mission alive!
