WASHINGTON:The spectre of a nuclear bomb, hidden in a cargo container, detonating in an American port has prompted Congress to require 100 per cent screening of U.S.-bound ships at their more than 600 foreign starting points.
The White House and shippers maintain the technology for scanning 11 million containers each year doesn't exist, and say the requirement could disrupt trade. Current procedures including manifest inspections at foreign ports and radiation monitoring in U.S. ports are working well, they contend. Nonetheless, President George W. Bush earlier this month signed the measure into law, praising its shift of funds to states and cities at higher risk of terrorism attack and saying he will work with lawmakers to ensure the cargo screening provisions don't impede commerce.
Scanning containers at their point of origin in other countries is a highlight of that law, intended to fulfill recommendations of the 9/11 Commission for safeguarding the United States from terrorist attack. It sets a five-year deadline for having the system in place but - recognising the technology might not be ready - gives the Homeland Security secretary the authority to extend that deadline by two-year increments.
"If a terrorist manages to conceal a weapon of mass destruction in a shipping container, it must be discovered long before that container reaches our shore," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said in support of the measure. Rep. Edward Markey, D-Mass., a chief proponent, said the costs and complexity involved in the new system pale beside the devastating effect of a nuclear attack launched from a big-city port. "The truth is, we cannot afford not to do it."
The White House issued a statement strongly opposing the scanning requirement, saying it was "neither executable nor feasible." Opponents warned it could cause huge backlogs at the nation's seaports, which handle some 95 per cent of goods coming into the country. Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff says, "it would be wonderful" if all containers were inspected before they left foreign ports. "But it's got to be done in a way that reflects reality and also reflects the fact that we're not the only players in this pool."
Small-volume ports
Industry groups that lobbied against the 100 per cent screening asked whether Congress intends to cut off trade with small-volume ports that can't install the needed technology. They also warn of foreign governments retaliating by requiring U.S. ports to set up the same inspection regimen.
"You have to have the permission of all these foreign points," said James Carafano, a defence expert at the Heritage Foundation. "There are a lot of people around the world who are going to be really teed off about this."
The Bush administration argues its current risk-based, layered approach to port security is a success. In one component of that approach, teams from Customs and Border Protection review manifests at some 50 ports covering more than 80 per cent of the container cargo shipped to the United States. Containers identified as high risk are subjected to X-ray and radiation scanning. Markey argues this is nothing more than a paperwork check that relies on descriptions of content supplied by shippers.
Less than five per cent of containers get scanned, and only a fraction of those are opened up and inspected. And under a pilot programme called the Secure Freight Initiative, created in a port-security bill passed last year, Homeland Security is testing high-volume scanning at six ports in Pakistan, Honduras, Britain, Oman, Singapore and South Korea.
The programme should give some indication of the practicality of the 9/11 Act provision, which requires containers to undergo both a radiation check and a scan with non-intrusive imaging such as X-rays that might locate highly enriched uranium or other materials that don't emit a lot of radiation.
New technology
Homeland Security's Domestic Nuclear Detection Office also plans to award up to $1.2 billion over the next five years to develop and acquire a next generation radiation monitor for land and sea cargo known as Advanced Spectroscopic Portals. Lawmakers have questioned whether the new technology offers much improvement over current monitors that are prone to false alarms set off by naturally occurring radioactive material in medical isotopes, ceramics or kitty litter.
Sen. Joseph Lieberman, I-Conn., and Rep. Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., chairmen of the Senate and House Homeland Security committees, said preliminary tests indicate the effectiveness of the new advanced monitors "may fall well short of levels anticipated." The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) quoted a figure of US$1.5 billion over three years to acquire and set up the scanning and detection equipment. The United States could provide financial aid to smaller countries, but the CBO said it expected most of the costs to be borne by foreign ports in order to maintain trade with the United States.
Source: Associated Press.
