I received an invitation earlier this week to address the UN Security Council at 10am on Friday. I posted this ahead of my performance. Here is my presentation. You can watch it live on YouTube.
Thank you, Mr. President. My compliments to the distinguished members of the Security Council. My name is Larry Johnson. I am here today to support Russia’s desire to have the UN Security Council conduct an open and comprehensive investigation into the sabotage of the Nord Stream pipeline in September 2022.
I am here at my own expense, without compensation for my time. All material and comments are my own. My aim in addressing you today is simple – I want to propose steps that I believe can help solve the mystery of the source of the attack on the Nord Steam Pipeline, and thus help resolve the tensions that resulted from that unprecedented attack . Perhaps I bring a unique perspective to this matter because of my prior experience in intelligence operations and analysis during my time with the Central Intelligence Agency while serving in the State Department’s Office of Counterterrorism, scripting and conducting more than 200 training missions against terrorism for US military special operations forces as a contractor, and with successful international money laundering investigations conducted as managing partner of BERG Associates. One of these investigations included a successful case conducted on behalf of the European Union and the governors of Colombia.
Let me start with President Harry S Truman. I believe I am the only one in this hall of honor who grew up in Independence, Missouri and went to high school across the street from Mr. Truman’s home. I had the privilege of meeting Mr. Truman briefly one morning in September 1970 as he strolled up North Delaware Street toward his presidential library, followed by a single bodyguard. What a difference 54 years makes.
It is true that Mr. Truman presided over the start of the Cold War between the United States and the Soviet Union. It is an unfortunate legacy. But I would remind the Council of Mr. Truman’s words to the new United Nations in October 1950. A 74-year-old message is still relevant and worth remembering:
“At the present time the fear of another great international war overshadows all the hopes of mankind. This fear arises from the tensions between nations and from the recent outbreak of open aggression in Korea. We in the United States believe that such a war can be prevented. We do not believe that war is inevitable.
One of the strongest reasons for this belief is our belief in the United Nations.
The UN has three major roles to play in preventing wars.
First: it provides a means of negotiation and settlement of disputes between nations by peaceful means.
Second: it provides a way to harness the collective strength of member states, under the Charter, to prevent aggression.
Third: it provides a way in which, when the danger of aggression is reduced, the nations can be relieved of the burden of arms”.
I believe it is not only the Security Council’s responsibility, but also the sacred duty, to take the lead in bringing about a solution to the Nord Stream issue by peaceful means. I will not review the mountain of evidence implicating my own country, the United States, in this act of war against the Russian Federation and the Federal Republic of Germany. There was no compelling national security interest to justify the destruction of the Nord Stream pipeline, which has caused significant economic pain to the people of Germany. This attack achieved nothing in terms of helping to end the conflict between Russia and Ukraine and Ukraine’s NATO facilitators. That made matters worse.
During my time at the CIA, I gained an understanding of how covert operations were planned and executed in places as diverse as Afghanistan and Central America. Such operations are not performed spontaneously. They are financed, planned and rehearsed before they are carried out. Seymour Hersh’s account of the US covert action against the Nord Stream pipeline is consistent with the knowledge I acquired during my time at the agency in the late 1980s.
When I began working for Ambassador Morris Busby in the Office of the Counter-Terrorism Coordinator at the US State Department in the fall of 1989, one of my first tasks was to obtain country clearance for the FBI as they investigated the bombing of Pan Am 103, which crashed in Lockerbie, Scotland in December 1988. One of the most important lessons I learned from that experience was the difference between a criminal investigation and an intelligence operation. Great care was taken to ensure that the evidence collected by the FBI was neither tainted nor destroyed by intelligence activities. It was a balancing act, but Ambassador Busby made sure that the FBI and CIA stayed in their respective areas.
Perhaps that is the most important lesson of all. Professional, mature leadership is essential to the successful investigation of complex, international operations resulting in attacks such as Pan Am 103 and the Nord Stream Pipeline. Although the criminal charges against the two men involved in carrying out the bombing did not come until November 1991, the evidence that solved the case came in March 1990 – 15 months after Pan Am 103 fell from the sky, and 20 months before the criminal charges.
Compare that investigation with the indifference and lack of curiosity NATO countries have shown regarding Nord Stream. It has been 19 months since the pipeline was destroyed and NATO countries seem to have adopted the attitude of the three wise monkeys – See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil.
I have some insight into the logistics and execution of the attack on Nord Stream thanks to the work I did on behalf of the US military’s special operations forces, which began in the spring of 1994 and ended in 2016. During those 22 years, I was part of a team that wrote more counter-terrorism exercises. We created scenarios, such as a group threatening to use a biological weapon in a North African country, and then replicated the diplomatic and intelligence traffic reporting the threat to stimulate a response from the particular military/diplomatic force tasked with analyzing, contain and defeat that threat. During this work we also had to think like saboteurs or terrorists. Understand their motives. Understand the capabilities required to carry out such an attack and identify the resources and training that would support such a terrorist operation.
Four years after I started advising the US military, I started BERG Associates with four others. Two of my partners formerly served in the Drug Enforcement Administration aka DEA – one ended his career as Chief of International Operations and the other ran undercover money laundering operations in New York City. One of our first jobs was the investigation of what is commonly known as the Bank of New York Russian money laundering case.
We also organized the investigation and collection of evidence used to file a Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) civil case against major tobacco companies, which laundered money for drug cartels. Two separate lawsuits were filed on behalf of the plaintiffs – the European Union and the governors of Colombia.
My point in mentioning this story is to emphasize that even in complex international investigations, without access to classified material, we were able to gather enormous amounts of evidence, which would have been admissible in a US criminal case.
In doing this research, I learned that Disneyland is right – it is a small world after all. The connection between certain criminal organizations, large international companies, financial institutions and intelligence organizations is not imaginary. It is real and involves hundreds of billions of dollars.
My experience convinces me that a properly funded investigation conducted by professionals will uncover documents, informants and eyewitnesses that can prove beyond a reasonable doubt who carried out the Nord Stream Pipeline bombing.
The nations gathered here have one advantage in an investigation that we as private investigators did not have – you have signals intelligence and satellites. For example, you have stored data that can provide intelligence ranging from the movement of ships to the movement of money. When you combine this data with conventional evidence, you have a powerful means of identifying who ordered and carried out the bombing of the Nord Stream pipeline.
I can say this much with certainty about that operation. It was carried out with financial and material support from at least one nation state. They are written records, almost certainly highly classified and stored with very limited access. But there may be evidence available outside such classified records that could shed significant light on the plot, if not solve the mystery.
My message to you today is simple – follow the money. Also ask, cui bono, who benefits. I believe that the refusal to carry out a thorough investigation of this case casts a shadow over the Security Council.
In conclusion, I repeat President Truman’s vision stated 74 years ago – You have it in your power to provide a means of negotiation and settlement of disputes between nations by peaceful means. But such negotiations must be based on a solid, supportable understanding of who did the deed, and I think you can come to that conclusion with a proper investigation that only you, the members of the Security Council, have the power to do.
