Hot Topics

Noteworthy

"The simple fact is that highly skilled foreign-born workers make enormous contributions to our economy [...] The US will find it far more difficult to maintain its competitive edge over the next 50 years if it excludes those who are able and willing to help us compete. Other nations are benefiting from our misguided policies."
Bill Gates,
Testimony before the Committee on Science and Technology, US House of Representatives,
March 12, 2008.

April 8, 2004

Trade Policy Analysis no. 27

Protection Without Protectionism: Reconciling Trade and Homeland Security

by Aaron Lukas

Aaron Lukas, formerly chief speechwriter and strategic advisor for the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, is an analyst at the Cato Institute's Center for Trade Policy Studies.

Executive Summary

For decades, criminals have used cargo containers, trucks, and train cars to illegally bring narcotics, weapons, and people across U.S. borders. The vulnerabilities that smugglers exploit are also available to terrorists.

The attacks on the USS Cole in the port of Yemen in 2000 and the French oil tanker Limburg in 2002 illustrate the direct threat that terrorism poses to seagoing vessels. Another prospect is that ships, trains, or trucks could be used in conventional suicide attacks, much like hijacked airliners were used on 9/11. A cargo ship or train car could also be exploded or sunk in a port or rail yard, damaging the facility and blocking commercial traffic. The worst-case scenario would involve a weapon of mass destruction entering the country via trade channels. Even a relatively modest nuclear weapon detonated in a major seaport would kill between 500,000 and 1 million people, directly destroy up to $500 billion worth of property, cause losses due to trade disruption of $100 to $200 billion, and impose further indirect costs of up to $1.2 trillion.

The Department of Homeland Security has begun implementing programs and procedures designed to safeguard the transportation and supply chains. States, shippers, port authorities, exporters, manufacturers, and foreign governments all have important roles to play in that effort. Federal rules and regulations are necessary but should be as open-ended as possible. They should set security goals and verify how well the private sector meets them, rarely mandating specific technologies or processes. Securing the trading system against terrorism is a regrettable but real cost of doing business internationally, and consumers and companies should not be insulated from those costs.

The challenge for U.S. policymakers is to improve security while minimizing the loss of liberty and the benefits of economic openness. The task is made more difficult by domestic interests that press for measures that unfairly hinder their foreign competitors without appreciably improving U.S. security.

 

Trade Policy Analysis No. 27 (PDF, 28pgs, 197k)



Commentary

Immigration law should reflect our dynamic labor market
by Daniel Griswold
April 27, 2008

America will be poorer as Obama pursues the wealthier
by Sallie James
April 23, 2008

When employment lines cross borders
by Daniel Griswold
April 21, 2008

Dems betray our ally Colombia
by Daniel Griswold
April 18, 2008

View all

CTPS @ Liberty

Can the Resource Curse Be Lifted?
by Jason Kuznicki
May 12, 2008

A Promising Farm Bill Development
by Sallie James
May 8, 2008

No Way to Treat the Customers
by Daniel Ikenson
May 6, 2008

Ag Committee Chair Demands Higher Food Prices
by Daniel Griswold
May 5, 2008

View all