That is one of the two main scenarios being considered during the hunt for the Arctic Sea cargo ship, which disappeared after leaving the English Channel. The other scenario centres upon a possible commercial dispute. The search continues meanwhile.
The Arctic Sea left Finland for Algeria two weeks ago and has not been contacted or made contact since she left the English Channel on July 28 after a routine Channel check-in procedural radio call with British maritime authorities.
Reports from Swedish police issued before the ship reached the Channel said that the ship had been boarded by around ten armed men claiming to be members of anti-drug authorities before it reached the English Channel.
But the Arctic Sea had already passed through the Channel before Interpol alerted English maritime authorities of the hijacking after having themselves been alerted via diplomatic channels.
The ship never arrived at Bejaia, its destination.
A large-scale hunt for the ship has since been organised. It includes at least five Russian warships and two Russian submarines as well as support from several other countries. The Arctic Sea had a 15-strong Russian crew when it left Finland.
Theories are beginning to emerge about the possible reasons for the ship’s disappearance, particularly in the light of the fact that the ship is widely believed to have been hijacked.
The Independent reports that the ship may be carrying a secret cargo according to some experts.
Mikhail Voitenko is the editor of a Russian maritime affairs bulletin, Sovfracht. He believes that the ship may not only be carrying its registered cargo, a £1 million load of timber. The timber was loaded onto the ship in Finland.
In an interview with Russia’s Today news channel he said "The only sensible answer is that the vessel was loaded secretly with something we don't know anything about. We have to remember that before loading in Finland the vessel stayed for two weeks in a shipyard in Kaliningrad. I'm sure it cannot be drugs or illegal criminal cargo. I think it is something much more expensive and dangerous."
Drugs are not suspected to be the reason for the ship’s disappearance, with experts pointing out that Finland and Russia are not known drug exporters, but rather importers.
It has been reported that the ship may have been spotted by Portugese airborne coastguards, but the Portugese authorities deny that the ship ever entered its waters.
The Maltese authorities have said that it is highly unlikely that the ship has entered the Mediterranean Sea, access to which is only possible on Europe’s Western seaboard from the very narrow and heavily controlled Straits of Gibraltar.
The UK authorities, who made contact with the Arctic Sea before it entered the English Channel, described the situation as "bizarre".
"Who would think that a hijacked ship could pass through one of the most policed and concentrated waters in the world?" said Mark Clark of the UK Maritime and Coastguard Agency. “"There didn't seem anything suspicious when contact was made," he added. "It could well be that a crew member had a gun put to his head by a hijacker when contact was made."
The case is baffling European and other experts because there have been no reported piracy incidents in European waters for over 2 hundred years.
Another theory for the ship’s disappearance is offered by Nick Davis, head of Anti-Piracy Maritime Security Solutions, a private shipping security company, to
BBC News.
He thinks that the reasons for the taking of the ship could be centred upon a ‘commercial dispute” and that one of the parties involved could have “decided to take matters into their own hands.”
He went on to say that even if that was the reason, the hostile boarding and navigational control of of a ship is a piracy offence, and “no different from what the Somalis do.”
Finally, families of the ship’s crew, who are all said to come from the Russian port city of Arkhangelsk, have refused to speak to the media about the issue.
