Port Security Still In The News: At Dubai Model Port & In The US

Gaps in Security Stretch From Model Port in Dubai to U.S.

DUBAI, United Arab Emirates, Feb. 25 — To some American officials, the sprawling port along the Persian Gulf here, where steel shipping containers are stacked row after row as far as the eye can see, is a model for the post-9/11 world.

Fences enclose the port's perimeter, which is patrolled by guards. Gamma-ray scanners peek inside containers to make sure they carry the clothing, aluminum, timber and other goods listed on shipping records. Radiation detectors search for any hidden nuclear material.

But those antiterrorism measures still fall far short of what is needed to ensure security, American government auditors and maritime experts say.

If the port in Dubai is a model, and it fails to meet muster, what does that say about our own ports that are in no way close to the Dubai model?

The scanning devices, for example, can check only a small fraction of the millions of containers that flow through here every year. The radiation detectors most likely would not pick up a key radioactive ingredient in a nuclear bomb, even if it was just modestly shielded. And the system that selects containers for inspection relies upon often-incomplete data.

In short, even at this model port, the security regimen set up in the aftermath of the Sept. 11 attacks, largely at the request of the United States government, is far from enough to address the vulnerabilities that make ports still such an attractive terrorist target.

I feel affirmed... I've been saying and writing about these security flaws at our ports since 1995! And so have a lot of other folks with better credentials and a lot more experience with national security than me. Our ports are a tremendous liability and connects the entire nation via trucks, railways and shipping lanes.

It explains why so many port experts consider as misplaced the furor that erupted this week over whether Dubai Ports World, the government-owned company that operates this port, should be allowed to take over management of terminals in six American cities.

I disagree. I think we need to take even more stringent steps to assure port security, including limiting ownership and operation under specific regulations, requiring inspections at both the points of origin and receipt, setting up mutual security credentials and certification processes, as well as putting more people on the ground for inspection and security purposes.

The trouble is not focused at the end of the line — the port terminal at the American shore. It is spread up and down the supply chain at critical points across the globe, no matter what the United States government and partners like United Arab Emirates have so far tried.

It also goes to our rail yards, trucking depots, manufacturing plants, food stores and elswhere along the highways and biways of our nation. When we talk about "single points of failure" (SPOFs), our ports and the supply chain they support are a long chain of SPOFs.