أثناء تعويم السفينة الجانحة
مادلين طوق
في ظلّ رياح عاتية هبّت في 23 آذار 2021 ووصلت إلى قناة السويس، جَنَحَت واحدة من أكبر سفن الحاويات في العالم هي السفينة EVER GIVEN. كما بات معروفًا. يومها، سُدّ ممرّ القناة ستّة أيّام، ما أدى إلى عرقلة حركة المرور في كِلا الإتجاهين وتالياً في تعطيل حركة التجارة العالمية. وككلّ حادث من هذا النوع، تبدأ الجهات المعنية، وبينها شركات التأمين، بإجراء التحقيقات اللازمة لمعرفة من المسبّب ومن عليه تسديد التعويضات.
في جديد التحقيقات أن هيئة القناة تتحمّل هذا الخطأ لأنها سمحت للسفينة بالعبور في أحوال جوية لم تكن مؤاتية، وهو ما تسبّب في جنوحها. لكنّ مصادر في الهيئة ذكرت، قبلاً، أن التحقيقات أظهرت أن الأسباب الأساسية للحادث تكمن في عيوب في تصنيع السفينة وخطأ من ربانها، نافيةً وقوع أية أخطاء من جانب مرشدي القناة.
لكن في الإطار نفسه، نُقِل عن مسؤولَيْن يعملان ضمن فريق الإنقاذ التابع للهيئة، أن “القبطان قام بمناورة خاطئة أدّتْ إلى انحراف السفينة بشدة قبل جنوحها بهذا الشكل”، وأن “المناورة الخاطئة تزامنت مع العاصفة الترابية ورياح شديدة”.
ويبدو أنّ الرياح العاتية استُبعِدت عن لائحة الاتّهام، بعدما تبيّن أنّ 12 سفينة عبرت القناة في ظروف جوية مشابهة لم تشكّل عائقاً أمام حركة الملاحة في القناة. أمّا الشركة التايوانية المشغِّلة لسفينة EVER GIVEN رفعت عن نفسها مسؤوليّة أيّ تأخير في نقل البضائع لأنّ الاتفاقيات المبرمة مع العملاء لا تضمن وقت وصول الشحنات، وفق رئيسها إيريك هيسه.
ويبقى الأهمّ: هو استئناف حركة الملاحة في القناة بعد نجاح عملية تعويم السفينة الجانحة وتحريكها، ولو من دون وصول التحقيقات إلى نتيجة نهائيّة بشأن هذا الحادث، ما يدفع إلى التساؤل: هل التحقيق في حادث قناة السويس (على صغره)، سيلحق بتحقيقات انفجار مرفأ بيروت في 4 آب والتي لم تنجلِ بعد؟
معروف أنّ قناة السويس افتتحت في العام 1869، ومذّاك، شهدت عدة مراحل من التوسّع والتحديث من أجل مواكبة تطوّر التجارة البحرية، إذ هي تُعدّ رابطاً بين آسيا وأوروبا لاختصارها المسافات وتقليص مدّة الرحلة ما بين أسبوع إلى أسبوعين كانت ستحتاجهم السفن للالتفاف حول إفريقيا.
ولأنّ حادث سفينة Ever Given يستحقّ معرفة المزيد عنه، خصوصًا من صاحب خبرة في التأمين البحري، فقد اتّصلنا بأحد أبرزهم هو الكابتن ريتشارد شلهوب صاحب شركة Broktech، وكان بيننا الحوار التالي:
Q: Due to your information in the program of the sea insurance, did the world have similar accidents before? Can you talk about some of them especially that the sea insurance was the first insurance known by the sector
A: As far as the Suez Canal is concerned, the canal was blocked already a few times in its history, I believe 5 times, but it was merely due to political reasons except one, if I remember correctly, a cargo ship accident that had blocked the Suez Canal in 2006 due to a storm, but the vessel was re-floated within hours. As Far as the EVER GIVEN is concerned, it’s the first time that such an accident has occurred blocking the Canal for almost 7 days and creating huge losses not only to the Suez Canal Port Authorities income wise, but also interrupting the supply chain with the consequence of many losses as regards to the international economy
Q: The incident of the Suez Canal… is it fate? So the reinsurance companies can cover the losses without need of investigations knowing that some people linked between the explosion of Beirut port and this incident planking that Israel is trying to open a canal parallel less distant and can be an alternative to this canal
A: The “EVER GIVEN” is one of the biggest container carriers in the world with a capacity of more than 20,000 TEU (Twenty Foot Equivalent Unit). The owner is a Japanese Company ‘Shoei Kisen Kaisha’ and operated by the Taiwanese ‘Evergreen Co.’ The vessel is 400 meters long and 59 meters wide, with a draft (part under the waterline) of 15,7 meters. Certainly, this type of vessel, due to its size, requires experienced navigation skills. Therefore, it’s too early to ascertain the exact cause of the grounding of the “EVER GIVEN”. The Media has mentioned that at the time of the accident, the weather was bad, sand storm and winds up to 40 knots (approx. 75 km/h) speed. Due to the high amounts of containers stowed on deck the whole length of the “EVER GIVEN,” which acts like a sail, the ship re-acts to the winds by deviating from its original course; however, it could also be an accumulation of many factors that led to this unfortunate accident to occur. Therefore, in order to avoid any assumptions in this respect, we have to wait for the statements of the Captain, Officers and Crew, but as well as the statements of the 2 pilots who were on board the vessel during the passage. Pilots are considered as advisors to the Captain, but the full responsibility remains with the Captain. In addition, the VDR (Voyage Data Recorder) which is similar to a Black Box on planes must be thoroughly examined by the experts. Taking the above into consideration, the vessel has a Hull and Machinery Insurance in place, which means that damages to the vessel as well as physical damages to third party are covered. It’s not yet clear whether the vessel has suffered any damages until detailed diving operations are carried out and the outcome is to be approved by the Classification Society. The salvage operation is normally covered under the H&M insurance. The Captain, respectively owners are responsible for the salvage. So far, it’s known that no other ships sustained any damages. On the other hand, the “EVER GIVEN also has a P&I (Protection & Indemnity) cover which is a liability cover to Ship owners towards ship, cargo, crew and pollution. It’s fortunate that no pollution as such has occurred
As regards to the containers on board and the cargo inside, any damages are covered under the P&I policy. The cargo is as such not damaged due to the grounding unless it’s a kind of perishable cargo. It also could be possible that some of the cargo not delivered on time would be subject to a penalty, but this may be not the issue in a “Force Majeure” case; however, this remains to be studied
I would like to abstain commenting on the explosion of the port of Beirut and the grounding of the container carrier “EVER GIVEN” in relation to the previewed project opening a shorter Canal. These are two different issues and not as such related to each other
Q: In your opinion who is the reinsurance companies that can cover this ship and its cargo? Can we know the size of the losses within this framework
A: It seems that H&M is insured in Japan. It’s not yet known who the reinsurers behind it are. However, due to the high value of such a vessel which is estimated being insured for approx. US $ 150 million (not yet confirmed), certainly the insurance is spread over the market. The P&I is insured with the UK P&I Club. As far as the cargo inside the containers is concerned, it could be insured everywhere depending on the Incoterms (International Commercial Terms) and how the cargo was purchased. In fact, 10 containers could belong to one owner or the cargo in one container belongs to 10 owners. Anyhow, we are talking about a huge amount of cargo policies here for the containers on board the “EVER GIVEN”
There is no estimation yet in place about the quantum of the losses, but it will be very expensive for both insurers and reinsurers
Q: What is the importance of the Suez Canal in the marine navigation
A: Around 50 ships per day take the passage through the Suez Canal which is considered as one of the main shipping routes between Far East and Europe. Due to the blocking of the Suez Canal, the Suez Canal Port Authorities may suffer big loss of income. At the time the “EVER Given” was refloated approx. 400 ships were stuck in the Northern entrance (Mediterranean) as well as in the Southern entrance (Red Sea). This blocking has serious consequences as the supply chain, almost worldwide has been disrupted, i.e. traders waiting for their cargo might have consequences out of it. Whether the “EVER GIVEN” could be held liable is questionable
