Port Security: The Needs are Urgent!

By JOHN A. PANNETON, National President

The decision by Dubai Ports World (DPW) to sell or spin off its U.S. interests brings to a close a small chapter in the broader story of unanswered questions about port security in the United States. The move averts an unnecessary showdown between the president and Congress and forestalls a rush to judgment by those who appeared ready — even eager — to ban foreign involvement in the operation of U.S. port terminals and perhaps diminish foreign investment in the United States.

DPW’s withdrawal provides an opportunity for a cooling-off period and a dispassionate assessment by an independent panel of security and economic experts who should be tasked to review the wisdom of foreign investment, generally, and U.S. security interests linked to foreign involvement in U.S. port operations. The panel also should look at the appropriate role of Congress in foreign acquisitions. The underlying purpose of the panel would be to restore public confidence in the institutions and processes used to review critical foreign investments.

More importantly, the public outcry over the prospect of a Middle East company being involved in U.S. terminal operations serves a greater good by casting a scorching public spotlight on the sad state of port security across the country. It is antiquated, underfunded and poses a clear and present danger to the security of our nation.

Only one-sixth of the more rigorous security enhancements stipulated after 9/11 for the nation’s 361 major ports have been funded, according to the American Association of Port Authorities. The required improvements are administered by the Coast Guard under the Maritime Transportation Safety Act.

The estimated cost is $7.3 billion over 10 years. Industry and local government must pay a portion. But the federal share — $650 million through 2005 — is meager relative to the need. Thus, dozens of ports have delayed security upgrades such as new lighting, surveillance cameras and “smart” ID cards for those authorized to enter the ports.

The Department of Homeland Security states that federal funding for port security — to cover Coast Guard and Customs and Border Patrol costs, for example — has risen 700 percent since 2001. But that does not pay for physical improvements at the ports.

New efforts designed to counter terrorists at ports include the Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism, which provides faster cargo processing to domestic and international organizations that meet U.S. security standards for their entire transportation chain. However, “Customs has only 80 inspectors to monitor the compliance” of the 5,800 import companies worldwide that joined the partnership, according to a commentary in The New York Times co-authored by James M. Loy, the retired Coast Guard commandant and former deputy secretary of Homeland Security, and Stephen Flynn, a port security analyst for the Council on Foreign Relations.

The International Ship and Port Security Code is a new, tougher security regime for international shipping. But to assess worldwide compliance with the code, the Coast Guard “has just 20 inspectors,” Loy and Flynn stated.

Lip service to the contrary, port security is still not a national priority 54 months after 9/11. The problem is not lack of solutions. Remedies abound. For example, legislation sponsored by Sen. Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, would require additional harbor security centers, mandatory “smart” cards, an increase in the number of cargo inspectors and a federal recommendation on the implementation of ship user fees to fund a portion of increased security costs. Those costs should be shared, and the federal government should spell out the portion of costs it will pay over the long term as a means to foster realistic planning and execution by all involved.

The remedy to the nation’s woes is political leadership of the type sorely missing during the mud fight over DPW. It is time for both parties in the White House and Congress to come together, establish priorities and approve an agenda to bolster the security of our nation’s ports. This is the least the American people deserve.

Semper Fidelis.