There are an awful lot of people weighing in on this issue who know absolutely nothing about how ports operate, or what the "operation" of particular port terminals actually means. I am not a fan of the Bush administration, but I think this particular issue is more about perception than reality, and it is the perceptions -- not the realities -- that are causing people to criticize Bush for his support for this deal.

I spent about seven years of my life working in port operations and port security for the US Coast Guard. I have inspected merchant vessels and onshore terminals of all types, and have conducted many inspections of intermodal cargo containers based on training I received from the Coast Guard and the US Army. I have conducted numerous inspections over a number of years -- of port facilities, vessels, and cargo containers -- at Port Newark, one of the ports that is part of this deal. To put it simply, Teribus is right; the nationality of the company that "operates" that port has very little to do with security at that port. Port security is handled by US government agencies, primarily the Coast Guard and Customs, and that will continue to be the case after this deal goes through.

There are redundant mechanisms in place to provide some level of security that is intended to prevent shipments of unauthorized materials into US ports. The system is not foolproof, and everyone involved acknowledges that only a small fraction of intermodal cargo containers are physically inspected. It cannot be otherwise if we want our economy to continue to thrive; mandated inspections of all or most containers would be so burdensome and time-consuming that it would have dramatic negative consequences on the US economy. And since the strength of the US is dependent on our continuing to have a robust economy, and continued foreign trade, matters that affect the US economy also affect US security.

Port security, in an age when shipping worldwide is containerized, is a difficult issue, and like most difficult issues it requires that we accept certain tradeoffs. We cannot weigh the various factors that go into these decisions without getting into the details. When we reach snap judgments based on scary-sounding headlines, without examining the underlying facts, we do ourselves, and our country, a real disservice. I would suggest that it might be better if all of us suspended our preconceptions ("Arabs will now be running our ports? OH NO!"), and tried to figure out the facts behind the rhetoric.