terrorists could load a bomb on a truck and cross that border. But it would be easier to load a bomb in a cargo ship halfway 'round the world, ship it directly to the heart of one of the largest US cities, and remotely detonate the bomb.
Here's a piece about security in Dubai's model port:
The New York Times
February 26, 2006
Gaps in Security Stretch From Model Port in Dubai to U.S.
By HASSAN M. FATTAH and ERIC LIPTON
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.
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.
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.
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.
Security experts say the far more profound issue is the wide distance between what is needed for effective monitoring in terms of technology and programs versus what is on the ground.
"The goals that have been established are the right ones," said Senator Susan Collins, Republican of Maine, who is the chairwoman of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee. "We do need to extend our borders and push the threat from our shores. But the implementation has been flawed and thus cannot deliver on the promise of the programs."
Some are even harsher in assessing progress in safeguarding ports worldwide.
"Port security today is still a house of cards," said Stephen E. Flynn, a retired Coast Guard commander. "For each of these programs, the bar is not very high and there is very little in the way of verification. The result is it is not much of an effective deterrent."
More than 25 years ago, the Jebel Ali Port, here at the northern end of Dubai, was little more than a stretch of desert sand. Now, it is the world's 11th largest container port, where 16,000 vessels dock every year, moving more than 7.5 million containers in and out.
The government of the United Arab Emirates, a close ally of the United States, has cooperated over the last few years in imposing new security measures requested by United States customs and Coast Guard officials. Those changes came mostly after Sept. 11 and after the Dubai port had been used as a transfer point for equipment on its way to Libya that was intended to enrich uranium for a nuclear bomb.
* * *
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/26/national/26port.html?th=&emc=th&pagewanted=print
Mariner
