On September 26, 2022, the destruction of the Nord Stream gas pipelines sent shockwaves through Europe, severing a critical economic artery between Russia and Western Europe. The explosions not only damaged a key energy supply route but also set the stage for broader geopolitical ramifications, intensifying Russia’s pivot toward Asia and further militarizing NATO’s eastern flank. Despite the enormity of the attack and its consequences, the truth about what happened to Nord Stream remains elusive. How can such a massive act of terrorism remain shrouded in mystery? To answer this, we must look at the broader political dynamics of narrative control, media complicity, and Western Europe’s apparent Stockholm Syndrome with its American ally.

From the moment the pipelines were destroyed, Western leaders and media outlets were quick to point the finger at Russia. The idea that Russia, after investing billions in the Nord Stream project, would blow up its own infrastructure was propagated as fact. The narrative did not align with logic, yet it was repeated and accepted uncritically. NATO even suggested that the attack on Nord Stream could be considered grounds for triggering Article 5, the collective defense clause. The geopolitical stakes of blaming Russia for the attack were massive, escalating tensions in Ukraine, justifying NATO’s militarization of the Baltic Sea, and even paving the way for Sweden and Finland to join the alliance.

The media, for its part, became a willing stenographer for this narrative. Reports abounded that “all signs point to Russia” without offering concrete evidence. The absurdity of the situation-Russia supposedly bombing its own pipeline or, more outlandishly, shelling a nuclear power plant under its own control-was swept aside with the catch-all explanation: it was part of the “Russian playbook.” In this constructed reality, dissenting voices questioning the narrative were silenced or smeared as Russian sympathizers.

The house of cards began to crumble with journalist Seymour Hersh’s explosive report, which suggested that the United States had orchestrated the attack. Hersh, a veteran of investigative journalism with a long history of exposing government malfeasance, was suddenly derided as a conspiracy theorist. Yet his report marked the beginning of a subtle narrative shift. By 2023, US officials were quietly moving away from the claim that Russia had bombed its own pipeline and instead began floating the idea that rogue Ukrainian elements were behind the attack.

The Wall Street Journal reported in June 2023 that the US had known about the Ukrainian plan to sabotage the Nord Stream pipelines months in advance and had even warned Ukraine against carrying out the operation. This shift in blame is significant because it represents an implicit admission that the U.S. and NATO had lied to the public. They had used the Russia-blame narrative to justify their actions-escalating the war in Ukraine, militarizing the Baltic Sea, and pushing for NATO expansion. Now, without ever apologizing or explaining the previous lies, the narrative simply moved on to a new target: Ukraine.

The destruction of Nord Stream cannot be viewed in isolation. For years, the US has been vocal in its opposition to the project, viewing it as a threat to its strategic interests in Europe. In a 2019 report, the RAND Corporation, closely tied to US intelligence, explicitly outlined the goal of weakening Russia by cutting its energy ties to Europe. A key step in this strategy was halting Nord Stream 2.

American officials, including prominent figures like Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, Senator Ted Cruz, and President Joe Biden, all expressed their desire to see the pipeline stopped. In February 2022, just before the Russian invasion of Ukraine, Biden stood next to German Chancellor Olaf Scholz and stated bluntly: “If Russia invades Ukraine, there will be no Nord Stream 2. We will bring an end to it.” When asked how the US would achieve this, given that the pipeline was a German-Russian project, Biden cryptically promised: “We will do that.”

US opposition to Nord Stream was not merely a matter of rhetoric. Economic sanctions were imposed on European companies involved in the project, and American officials continually pressured Germany to abandon the pipeline. The geopolitical stakes were clear: Nord Stream represented a key link between Russia and Europe that undermined US dominance in the region.

The aftermath of the Nord Stream attack saw several US officials all but gloating over the destruction of Europe’s critical energy infrastructure. Secretary of State Antony Blinken described it as a “tremendous opportunity” for Europe to reduce its dependence on Russian energy. Victoria Nuland, the US Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs, was even more explicit: “We are gratified to know that Nord Stream 2 is now a hunk of metal at the bottom of the sea.”

This overt celebration raised eyebrows, especially given the official narrative that Russia had destroyed its own pipeline. If Russia had indeed sabotaged its own infrastructure, why would US officials be so pleased? The dissonance was palpable, but it was quickly brushed aside in favor of maintaining a united front against the supposed Russian threat.

Perhaps the most striking aspect of this entire affair is the subservience of Western European governments to the American narrative. Despite being the primary victims of the Nord Stream attack-losing access to a critical energy supply-European leaders largely fell in line with Washington’s talking points. When the US began shifting the blame from Russia to Ukraine, European politicians, including German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius, suggested that the attack might have been a “false flag” operation designed to frame Ukraine.

The media’s reaction was equally tepid. Coverage of Hersh’s report was either dismissive or non-existent, and discussions about the US and Ukraine’s involvement were downplayed. When facts threatened the unifying narrative, the solution was simply to ignore them. Sweden, for instance, refused to form a joint investigation team with Germany and other allies, citing national security concerns. When Russia proposed an independent investigation under the auspices of the United Nations, Western countries quickly blocked the initiative.

This behavior, which can only be described as Stockholm Syndrome, underscores the extent to which European leaders have subordinated their national interests to Washington’s geopolitical goals. Even as Germany’s industrial base falters due to skyrocketing energy costs, there is little appetite to confront the uncomfortable reality that one of their closest allies may have sabotaged their critical infrastructure.

As the Nord Stream narrative continues to evolve, cracks are beginning to appear in the façade of NATO unity. Germany’s humiliation is becoming increasingly apparent as accusations emerge that both Poland and Ukraine were involved in the attack. Former German intelligence chief August Hanning has publicly questioned the official story, suggesting that such an operation could not have taken place without the approval of top political leaders.

Meanwhile, Poland has deflected criticism by accusing Germany of enabling Nord Stream in the first place, and Czech President Petr Pavel has gone so far as to justify the attack if Ukraine was responsible, claiming that Nord Stream was a legitimate target.

The unity that NATO once enjoyed, built on the foundation of a shared Russian enemy, is beginning to unravel as facts become impossible to ignore. As Germany’s economy continues to decline, and other European countries begin to question their role in this debacle, the consequences of subjugating reality to narrative control are becoming clear.

Despite these cracks, the Stockholm Syndrome that grips Western Europe is unlikely to dissipate anytime soon. There will always be a new narrative to take the place of the old one, and uncomfortable facts will continue to be buried in the pursuit of unity. For now, the Western European populace remains trapped in a state of blissful ignorance, following the script handed down by their leaders and clinging to the illusion of moral clarity. But as the Nord Stream saga demonstrates, the longer reality is ignored, the more painful its eventual return will be.

Please follow Blitz on Google News Channel