A sovereign country could potentially destroy a ship if it damages undersea internet cables or pipelines, but it depends on several legal, political, and military factors.

Key Considerations:

1. Intent vs. Accident:

   • If a ship accidentally damages infrastructure, nations typically seek diplomatic or legal resolutions rather than immediate military action.
   • If a ship deliberately damages critical infrastructure, it could be seen as an act of war or sabotage, justifying military retaliation.

2. Territorial vs. International Waters:

   • In territorial waters (within 12 nautical miles): A country has full sovereignty and can take direct action, including force, to protect its infrastructure.
   • In international waters: Nations have limited rights but can defend themselves if an attack on vital infrastructure is considered an act of aggression.

3. International Law & Justification:

   • The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) protects undersea cables and pipelines. Willful destruction could violate international law.
   • Article 51 of the UN Charter allows self-defense if an attack occurs, but the response must be proportionate.
   • NATO & Collective Defense: If the target belongs to a NATO country, it could invoke Article 5, treating the attack as aggression against all member states.

4. Real-World Precedents:

   • Nord Stream Pipeline Incident (2022): Though still unclear who was responsible, the attack on the pipeline sparked discussions about retaliatory actions.
   • Undersea Cable Sabotage Concerns: Nations, including the UK and US, have warned about threats from Russian spy ships near cables.

Conclusion:

A country could destroy a ship if it deliberately damages critical infrastructure, especially in its own waters. However, in international waters, a military response would need strong legal justification and could risk escalating tensions.