Ruby cargo ship with Russian ammonium nitrate stranded off Kent

The Ruby cargo ship, loaded with 20,000 tonnes of Russian ammonium nitrate, remains anchored off Kent after being refused entry in several countries

What is a vessel doing with 20,000 tonnes of ammonium nitrate—the same compound that devastated Beirut in 2020—moored off the British coast, without a tug and with a damaged hull? The Ruby, flying the Maltese flag and carrying Russian cargo, has been a diplomatic and logistical problem for weeks that no one wants to take on. Cracked ballast tanks and a broken propeller shaft left it adrift in the North Sea. Since then, it has been turned away by various ports, and its acompañante tug disappeared overnight. The UK Coastguard maintains contact with the ship, but a solution remains elusive.

What is ammonium nitrate and why is it concerning?

Ammonium nitrate is a common fertilizer, but also a potential explosive if mixed with fuel. The comparison with Beirut is inevitable: there, 2,750 tonnes of the same compound caused an explosion that killed more than 200 people. Here we are talking about 20,000 tonnes, seven times more. A calculation circulating in the analysis of the case suggests that, in the worst-case scenario, the detonation could be equivalent to a small atomic bomb. This is not gratuitous alarmism: the figure is on the table and explains why no port wants it nearby.

The legal and diplomatic maze of a ship with opaque ownership

The Ruby is a puzzle of opaque ownership. Maltese flag, Russian cargo, registered owner in Dubai based in Syria, and leased to another Dubai-based company with Russian links. Flags of convenience, like Malta's, serve to evade responsibilities, and this is evident here. Norway considered it seaworthy but expelled it from Tromsø. The Baltic closed its entrance. The UK keeps it anchored off Kent but does not accept it in port. Meanwhile, the tug that was escorting it vanished. The question is who pays the bill for a ship that no one claims.

The risk of sabotage and the shadow of hybrid warfare

In the context of the war in Ukraine, the possibility of Russian sabotage hangs over the case. There is no proof, but the combination of opaque flag, explosive cargo, and "accidental" damage fuels the theory. A drifting ship, out of control, can be a weapon if someone decides to detonate it. The UK Coastguard is monitoring, but the hypothesis of a false-flag attack is not dismissed in discussions. The irony is that, if it explodes, no one will know whether it was an accident or intent.

Options on the table: unload the cargo or let it rot

The most logical solution would be to bring the Ruby into a port, unload the nitrate, and then repair the hull in dry dock. But no one wants to assume the risk of an explosion during the maneuver. Another option is to repair it at sea, which would take weeks and incur enormous costs. Meanwhile, the ship remains anchored in British waters, with high-power tugs nearby just in case. The international maritime community looks the other way. The problem is not technical, it is political.

The precedent of the Cabo Machichaco and other floating bombs

History has examples of ships with explosive cargo that ended badly. The Cabo Machichaco exploded in the port of Santander in 1893, leaving hundreds dead. The Ever Given blocked the Suez Canal and paralyzed world trade. The Ruby does not block a route, but it is a floating bomb in one of the busiest areas on the planet. The difference is that now we know what it carries and yet no one wants to unload it. Bureaucracy and antiestéticar can be more dangerous than the nitrate itself.

The Ruby remains there, rocked by the waves, with its lethal cargo and crew on board. No one wants to take charge. And while governments debate, the ship waits. If something goes wrong, it will not be for lack of warnings.