Posturing about Ports

I'm becoming more and more convinced that while there are legitimate details needing to be discussed about the DWP deal, that Congress--on both sides--is preening.

I just heard a Chuck Schumer quote that made me want to reach through the radio and throttle him. It's irresponsible to make such comments because they obscure the truth about port security and displays a serious lack of understanding of the details.

Revisiting Alistair McNab: They're going to be operating a terminal as a tenant," McNab said. "The Port Authorities are still in charge. I've seen these statements that Dubai Ports World is 'taking over' these ports. The statements in my view are designed to inflame passions rather than to give the truth. There are so many misstatements it's breathtaking."

Through the GHPB, McNab has worked with other maritime associations to internationalize maritime security regulations. He said that critics of the plan don't seem to get it. "The U.S. Coast Guard has taken the lead on port security not just in the United States but around the world since the Homeland Security Act in 2002. It hasn't just been U.S. legislation, but International Maritime Organization (IMO) legislation which paralleled the new U.S. security paradigm. The world standards through the IMO were driven by the U.S. Coast Guard. We got just about everything we wanted regarding port cargo and personnel security. It's not just the U.S. --the whole world is on the same page. It doesn't matter if it's a port in New York or Dubai or Sydney-- we all comply with the same regulations. There is worldwide enforcement. We feel quite pleased that the U.S. took a leadership position in enacting the kind of international security regime we envisaged. All that was done through the Department of Homeland Security but particularly through the U.S. Coast Guard."

The USCG takes a lead role not just in setting security standards, but enforcing them. It collects a mind-boggling amount of data on all vessels, cargo and crew entering the United States, which is then subjected to a deep analysis. If anything seems out of line, the USCG boards the vessel before it gets anywhere near a port. In his article, Sanger includes the oft-cited statistic that "Only 4 percent or 5 percent of those containers [entering the U.S.] are inspected." But that statistic only applies to the containers that are randomly inspected by Customs above and beyond any containers triaged out of the supply chain because their documentation has raised a red flag or they come from someplace like Gaza and deserve extra scrutiny. And to randomly inspect a much larger percentage would incur economic losses in excess of the potential benefits of checking out every container of tube socks bound for Wal Mart.

The fight is being fought thousands of miles from any of the 6 US ports being discussed in this deal. It's being fought in the ports of origination in Asia and other exporters, not on the docks in Newark, NJ.

As pointed out by Mansoor Ijaz, the U.A.E.--regardless of what they did before--have been a very helpful ally in the post 9/11 war on terror: Whatever the UAE's policies in the pre-9/11 world (whether as home to A. Q. Khan's illicit nuclear network, one of three Taliban embassies, questionable banking practices, or as an alleged repository for Iranian-terror funds), Dubai's record under these young leaders in the post 9/11 world reflects serious and structural change in national strategy.

Lastly, consider this: If you're afraid about an Arab corporation working at port facilities on the East Coast of the United States, then you should be afraid right now, because for years there has been a Kuwaiti corporation that's been involved right here in the port of Newark in the port of New York and there has been no incident.

Preening and posturing ruins debates. People in positions of importance like Schumer ought to know some of these details before they open their mouths.