By John Q. Hosedrinker 
According to a report in La Verdad, a Spanish investigation suggests the Russian cargo ship Ursa Major, which sank in December 2024, was carrying undeclared components for two nuclear reactors destined for North Korea. The investigation purportedly found the ship had suffered damage consistent with a torpedo strike, including a hull breach. Spanish authorities reportedly discovered two undeclared containers linked to the reactors and believed the cargo’s destination to be Rason, North Korea. Following the sinking, Russia took control of the investigation, citing international maritime law and attempting to impede Spanish involvement.
Read the original article here
Let’s dive into this intriguing story about a Russian shadow fleet ship that supposedly met its demise in 2024, and the whispers surrounding its final voyage. The premise alone, as some have noted, practically leaps off the page like a Tom Clancy novel, promising a tangled web of international intrigue and potentially explosive secrets.
The core of the matter centers on the claim, reported by “La Verdad,” that the vessel was carrying nuclear reactor components destined for North Korea. This alone raises eyebrows, considering the sensitive nature of the cargo and the clandestine practices often associated with the Russian shadow fleet. Adding to the mystery, the ship’s sinking is shrouded in ambiguity. The official narrative may point to an accidental sinking or crew incompetence, but the rumors swirl around the possibility of a more deliberate act, potentially a torpedo attack.
Considering a torpedo strike, the evidence gets curiouser and curiouser. Initial accounts suggest the damage was caused by three external explosions. While regular torpedoes are a possibility, the seismic data of about 50 kg TNT eq. is quite small for a regular torpedo that typically carries a few hundred kg TNT, though lightweight anti-submarine torpedoes would fit. A more plausible, and perhaps simpler, explanation could be demolition charges strategically placed on the hull. The question of why Russia would opt for a circuitous sea route rather than the more direct land route via rail, given their shared border with North Korea, further complicates matters. It’s hard to overlook the apparent inefficiency of transporting such weighty components by sea, raising questions about what else might have been at play.
The finger-pointing game has already begun, and the suspected culprits could be anyone from the US or its allies to China or even Russia itself. The potential involvement of the US, or a nation with US permission, is a particularly compelling theory, given the implications of such an act. The very fact that this incident could be the work of a supercavitating torpedo, a niche weapon with a limited number of known operators, adds a layer of technical intrigue. These weapons, like the Russian VA-111 Shkval, are known for their speed and ability to travel underwater, theoretically making them a formidable tool for covert operations.
However, the “supercavitating torpedo” hypothesis is not without its skeptics. The claim relies on the unique capabilities of these weapons, requiring a careful examination of the evidence. Furthermore, some suggest alternative methods of attack, such as the use of limpet mines attached to the hull, a tactic that could be employed by specialized teams operating from submarines or other concealed platforms. These could be attached from an outside source or as an inside job, if the cargo had to be destroyed, like in the case of a failed trade for North Korean soldiers.
The sinking of this shadow fleet ship, whatever the cause, serves as a reminder of the complex and often murky world of international relations. With the shadow fleet’s nature, proving the ship’s involvement or destination is challenging. The possibilities are endless, and the truth may remain obscured by a fog of misinformation and intrigue.