On Monday, 27 May 2024, a Russian cargo ship sailing on the Don River at Rostov-on-Don struck a key train bridge that is used to supply Crimea. Whilst attempting to pass under the raised portion of the bridge, the vessel known as the Zelenga, malfunctioned failing to steer.
On 26 March 2024, a vessel lost control and struck the Francis Scott Key Bridge in Baltimore. The containership Dali, struck the primary support column, subsequently bringing down the bridge as well as vehicles and people on the bridge at the time of the incident.
Earlier this year, a bridge in southern China was struck and sliced in half, and in Argentina, the hull of a vessel was damaged after it hit a bridge. The phenomenon of ships colliding with bridges is not new. In 1975, an interstate freighter loaded with zinc concentrate collided with the Tasman Bridge causing a section of the bridge to fall onto the ship's deck. In 1960, two river barges struck one of the piers on the Severn Railway Bridge causing two spans to drop into the river. In 1980, a freighter crashed into the Sunshine Skyway Bridge. In 2007, the container ship M/V Cosco Busan struck one of the towers of the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge. The list goes on.
This trend of vessels striking bridges will likely persist, therefore it is worth investigating why these incidents have increased in 2024, and the broader security implications of said events. In addition to the risks to the vessel's crew as well as the people and vehicles on the bridge at the time of the collision, there may also be significant environmental consequences. While debris from the bridge can be salvaged from the water, addressing a potential oil spill may prove more challenging.
A collision resulting in loss of life, destruction of a bridge and/or environmental effects may lead to legal issues related to criminal liability, negligence, human error, regulatory compliance, wrongful death and personal injury claims. Typically, responsibility is shared among several parties, including bridge operators, the ship's crew, and sometimes port authorities, who may also be held accountable.
A pertinent question is what causes vessels to collide with bridges? Are the vessels unseaworthy? Is the issue the structure and sturdiness of the bridge? Did the steering gears malfunction? Could some of these incidents be deliberate premeditated acts of sabotage? Ultimately, the question is why is this happening so often, who stands to gain the most and who loses?
These increasing incidents will undoubtedly bring greater scrutiny to the shipping industry and ship owners and operators in particular. Moreover, these incidents shine a light on the necessity to think more seriously about critical infrastructure. There is also a need to think outside the box and consider scenarios where a vessel could be commandeered by nefarious actors, not for smuggling, but to commit acts of terror or sabotage by colliding with a bridge.
A paper by the International Centre for Counter-Terrorism (ICCT), notes that due to the intermodal and cross-sector functions of bridges, an attack would lead to cascading effects with the impact extending beyond the primary target. This is particularly true when said bridge is intertwined with critical infrastructure sectors and integral to the supply chain.
Regular assessments of maritime critical infrastructure are essential. Furthermore, stakeholders in the shipping industry, including ship owners, captains, and crew, must implement precautionary and preemptive measures to mitigate the risks of vessels colliding with bridges and other key structures.
Comments