Article by William Lusk, originally published in Caribbean Maritime. Article reposted with permission by the publisher.
Reading articles and watching television, all can agree that terrorism has lately dominated the headlines; ISIS was responsible for a shooting spree in Paris, violence persists on the U.S./Mexican border, and scores of cruise passengers were killed in an attack in Tunisia. The Caribbean region is not immune - Caribbean governments’ websites have been hacked by Middle Eastern militants, and the Caribbean Sea is used all too often as a conveyance to traffic people, drugs, and weapons. Incidents of piracy and armed robbery, although rare, do still plague the Caribbean. Despite these high profile challenges, our greatest threat, complacency, is setting in.
Perhaps the biggest indicator of complacency can be measured in dollars and cents. One example is the dwindling Port Security Grant Program, designed to build and sustain security and resiliency of ports in the United States. These funds, distributed by the Federal Emergency Management Agency of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), can be used for wide ranging purposes such as training and exercises, response vessels, detection equipment, sensors like cameras and radar, and more. The chart below details the amount made available per fiscal year:
| Fiscal Year |
Port Security Grant Program Amount Available (in millions of US Dollars) |
| 2015 | $100 |
| 2014 | $100 |
| 2013 | $93.2 |
| 2012 | $97.5 |
| 2011 | $235 |
| 2010 | $288 |
| 2009 | $388.6 |
| 2008 | $388.6 |
Not only is the size of the financial pot shrinking, smaller ports and law enforcement agencies must now compete directly against larger ports and agencies unlike years past. Further, much of the equipment purchased in 2008’s Port Security Grant Program allocation now needs repair or replacement although funds are no longer available to do so.
The financial effect is far reaching, and now the U.S. government is incapable of enforcing its own port security laws. For example, the Safe Ports Act of 2007 mandates that 100% of cargo containers bound for the U.S. be screened for radiological and nuclear material by 2012. Since the 2012 deadline, DHS Secretaries Napolitano and Johnson have waived this requirement because it is too expensive to implement, perhaps costing as much as $12 billion by some estimates.
Like ports, militaries and law enforcement agencies are not immune to budget cuts. “We have actionable intelligence on approximately 90 percent of known maritime drug movements…however, with too few surface and air assets to patrol the vast expanses of the transit zone, they can only attempt to target, detect and disrupt 20 percent of that known flow. You can do the math – it is an issue of capacity,” said Admiral Paul Zukunft, Commandant of the U.S. Coast Guard.
In Mexico, it has been reported that the proposed 2016 budget slashes its local law enforcement budget by approximately $172 million USD. National law enforcement in Mexico is also being hit hard by austerity measures. Alejandro Hope, the security and justice editor for El Daily Post, wrote of the Interior Ministry, “Gobernación as a whole has had the investment side of its budget…cut by 77 percent. It is under Gobernación that almost all federal public security programs are operated.”
The Honourable Colm Imbert, Minister of Finance of Trinidad and Tobago, was candid in recent remarks about their maritime security assets. In his 2016 Budget Statement, Minister Imbert said, “…when we came into office last month, we met a mix of naval assets hastily ordered and delivered for public relations purposes just before the 2015 Election – not fully outfitted, without armaments, and without proper financial arrangements in place. In local parlance, we purchased these new vessels ‘on trust’.”
Shipping lines and terminals are businesses just like any other, with shareholders and investors to answer to. Security investments like radars, cameras, fencing, guards, and others are very expensive to buy, train with, or maintain as necessary. Private sector executives, facing budget cuts just as governments in the aforementioned cases, may rhetorically ask about the return on investment for security acquisition beyond minimums called for by government and ISPS regulations. It is impossible to measure return on investment of security assets until a catastrophic event actually does occur. When a calamity happens, natural or manmade, the investment in security technology and/or training then becomes priceless to minimize the loss of life, property, and time to resume continuity of operation.
The maritime community in the Western hemisphere has been blessed in that no significant terrorist attack has occurred in vessels or ports. In letting our guard down by becoming complacent and unwilling to invest resources in security, the Caribbean maritime community will become no safer and prepared for terrorism than aircraft on September 10, 2001.
Risk can be defined as a simple mathematical formula: threat x vulnerability x consequence. With Caribbean islands so small and reliant on maritime commercial traffic for energy, food, trade, and tourism, any terrorist attack would have enormous consequence for the island(s) involved. The threat to the Caribbean is present. However we, the maritime stakeholders, have control over our vulnerability. Will we properly invest time and resources to lower our vulnerability? In doing so, we lower our risk and complacency.
