Tighter security in store for seaports: the Bush team wants to spend $11 billion to protect the nation's harbors from terrorist attacks. But critics fear the new security initiatives will stifle global trade

0 Comments | Insight on the News, Feb 25, 2002 | by Jamie Dettmer

But some administration officials and private security experts question whether the bill goes far enough. Loy and Customs Commissioner Robert Bonner want cargo destined for the United States to be inspected, sealed in tamperproof containers and certified as safe before shipment from overseas ports. They argue it is too risky to wait until the containers have arrived. Bonner told a Washington conference in January: "We must do everything in our power to establish a means to protect the global sea-container trade, and we must do it now -- before some devastating event occurs." (See news alert!, Feb. 11.)

Currently, fewer than 2 percent of the containers arriving at U.S. ports are inspected. The volume of container traffic is predicted to triple during the next decade or so, and even with scanning equipment the majority would escape monitoring.

Philip Anderson, a domestic-terrorism expert at the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies, agrees with Customs Commissioner Bonner, arguing that "once something has come here it is too late." But Anderson acknowledges to INSIGHT that "there are a lot of questions and few answers" when it comes to securing America's seaports. "I am not sure how we are going to ensure maritime and harbor security because of the sheer volume of the traffic," he says.

Even so, this terrorism expert believes in time there can be a greater level of safety -- that is, "if we go to the point of origin." He says computer profiling also can come in handy, just as it has in protecting civil aircraft from hijackers.

But not everyone is convinced that wide-ranging security measures are needed. Others fear the authorities will go too far and stifle trade.

With seaborne containers accounting for 46 percent of the value of imported goods brought into the country annually, business groups are beginning to stir, arguing that the new security measures being contemplated will act as a drag on commerce and lead to higher costs. They warn that some of the proposals will rankle foreign governments, including allies, and claim the United States will not be able to dictate to foreign ports what security measures they should adopt.

Stephen Flynn, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, warned at Senate hearings: "What is at stake is not just the opportunity for a terrorist who wants to launch another catastrophic terrorist attack on U.S. soil. But, to a considerable extent, the fate of global trade also rests in the balance."

The hawks point out that there is ample evidence that al-Qaeda has used container traffic and covertly owned freighters before to ship arms and bomb-making materials. The explosives used to blow up the U.S. embassies in East Africa in 1998 were delivered by an Osama bin Laden ship that docked at Mombasa, Kenya. And Italian authorities in October found an al-Qaeda operative and materials for gaining access to U.S. airports hidden inside a shipping container. And the homeland-defense specialists say global trade would be hit even harder if terrorists managed to use a container to detonate a weapon in a U.S. port.