Two brief terrorism scares at the Port of Miami, one of the nation?s busiest, have drawn international attention to the security of America?s ports and to their vulnerability to terrorist attacks. The two events in the Port of Miami?unidentified men in a cargo truck and a misidentified box of equipment?prompted officials to employ swift-acting security responses on local and federal levels. In addition, media outlets focused much of their coverage on these episodes. Shortly after both incidents, officials confirmed the cargo incident was the result of miscommunication and that the unidentified box contained fire sprinkler parts.
The politicized nature of port security in recent months, as well as the heightened international media attention on the Port of Miami events early in 2007, has raised important questions about the future of port security and the likelihood for terrorist attacks.
The Politicization of Port Security in 2006
The managerial oversight and security of America?s ports were of limited interest to most individuals outside the maritime, cruise, and longshoreman industries. This changed in February 2006, when Congressmen vocalized their alarm over of the management handover of several prominent East Coast ports by London-based P&O Ports to Dubai Ports World, a company headquartered in the United Arab Emirates . Later in 2006, new port-related funding raised the priority of port security in both financial and political circles.
Dubai Ports World, Port Security Legislation
Although the transaction between P&O Ports and Dubai Ports World had been discussed in the financial press for quite some time, Congress co-opted a previously innocuous business transaction into one both political and controversial. The main issue at stake became whether the US should ?outsource? port security to a foreign company, an ironic concern considering P&O Ports was itself owned by a foreign company. Several months after the controversy, Dubai Ports World announced it planned to sell ownership of its US operations to American International Group Inc.
In May, primed by the political sensitivities raised by the Dubai Ports World transaction, the House approved 421 to 2 legislation providing $7.4 billion in spending on port-related security and maintenance. Security fears were replaced by debates on the price tag of the legislation, which was finally reduced to $400 million by the time President George Bush signed the Security and Accountability for Every Port Act (SAFE) into law. Despite the ostensibly overwhelming bipartisan support for the measure, the issue has prompted political divisions over issues such as level of cargo screenings and the necessity of technology like radiation detectors.
Implications: Future Terrorist Threats
Port security as a political issue has several implications for the terrorist threat vulnerability of America?s ports. In short, the recently acquired political dimensions of port security in the US and the extensive media coverage bestowed upon the Port of Miami incidents, has greatly enhanced the ?symbolic value? of America?s largest ports. While border security issues and aerial transportation scrutiny have been hallmarks of homeland security since 9/11 ,, port security has been relegated unjustly to a secondary position. America?s ports represent essential facets, such as tourism and trade, of the country?s economic livelihood. These events have highlighted the prominence of port security to US national security.
In addition to political and symbolic cachet afforded to port security lately, media activity may also serve to attract would-be attackers to America?s ports. First, the attention lavished on port breaches may attract potential terrorists seeking to gain international attention. Second, many media reports examined in specific detail the main reasons why the cargo truck had been selected for greater inspection and subsequent detention, details such as the passenger manifest and specific documentation missing. Although the media should be thorough in its reporting of such events, some may argue that these reports may serve as a primer for would-be attackers.
Despite the terrorist threat potential to America?s ports that were magnified by the Port of Miami incidents, it does not seem likely that domestic ports will become targets of terrorist attacks in the near future. The intense media coverage of the incidents provided viewers with the level of organizational and operational security present in one of America?s largest ports. The swift and decisive action demonstrated the difficulty in gaining illicit access to the port. Furthermore, increased political attention on port security issues secured additional funding for the maintenance of America?s ports, guaranteeing improved operational security in the future.
Summary
The Port of Miami incidents have demonstrated that it would be more difficult than ever to gain unauthorized access to America?s vital ports, let alone plan and execute an attack on them. Politicization of port security and recent media coverage may have increased the appeal of America?s ports to would-be attackers; nevertheless, these two aspects have simultaneously made it more difficult to carry out an operation on any level.
In an interview with local press following the Port of Miami incidents, assistant port security and safety director James Maas said of the swift security response, ?It?s a different world that we live in now after 9/11.? His comment reflects the newly-acquired prominence of port security on America?s national security agenda, a designation that will likely continue in the future.
