Maritime Security Threat Vectors

The attacks of September 11 have exposed the vulnerability of the American homeland

against terrorism. Terrorists have already expressed their intentions to continue their

aggression towards United States. Their goal is to incur maximum economic damage,

inflict mass casualty, spread unprecedented fear among citizens and thus destabilize the

nation to further their agenda. Many critical sites lay across US maritime borders, all of

which could be potential targets to accomplish these goals. All these sites are simple

elements of a complex body where the vulnerability of the whole system is a function

of the vulnerability of the weakest element against an adaptive adversary. Ports, nuclear

facilities, LNG facilities, urban areas, bridges, chemical plants and other critical

infrastructure are all elements of this complex system. In this paper, we review the

current status of security in the American maritime realm and discuss the programs and

initiatives that seek to minimize terrorism risk. Our goal is to direct attention to various

possible avenues that could be used to illegally introduce weapons, explosives and

other contraband as well as to penetrate terrorists into the American homeland.

1 Disclaimer: This research was supported by the United States Department of

Homeland Security through the Center for Risk and Economic Analysis of Terrorism

Events (CREATE) under grant number N00014-05-0630. However, any opinions,

findings, and conclusions or recommendations in this document are those of the

authors and do not necessarily reflect views of the United States Department of

Homeland Security.

Page 2 of 33

1. Introduction

United States (hereafter US) sea borders include 95,000 miles of coastline and 3.4

million square miles 2 of exclusive economic zone. Huge economic value of trade,

number of jobs provided, and a multitude of stakeholders involved render security

along coasts and waterways critical for the American homeland. Port security is the

underpinning of the US economy and a terrorist attack may deliver a serious blow to

supply-chain operations and continuity of business. Besides, terrorists have already

expressed their intentions to target economic lifeline of the US, which raise concerns

that an attack in the maritime domain may be in the making. Despite the efforts after

September 11 (hereafter 9/11) to improve security, US waterways and critical

infrastructure along the borders remain vulnerable to a terrorist attack.

Maritime security is closely related to border security, which requires a systems

approach to protect the American homeland from a terrorist infiltration or attack. The

main objective of border security should be to minimize casualties, injuries and

economic losses due to terrorism, while ensuring flow of commerce, continuity of

business, conserving environment, as well as supporting international partnerships for

research, development, and education. As terrorist strategies are dynamic and terrorists

have shown their capability to develop tactics that are adaptive to new environments,

gaps in border security should be addressed following a comprehensive approach

seeking to reduce the risk at all potential points of illegal entry or a terrorist attack. As

such, to reduce the risk of terrorism along the borders, a systems-based risk

management approach that captures the complex relationship between multiple

elements and their exposure to interdependent risks should be implemented. Such an

approach will produce comparative risk assessments that will help deploy necessary

resources to sites facing the greatest risk, and mitigate exposure to a nationally tolerable

level.

US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has adopted a risk based approach to

counter terrorism. In this context, risk is defined as the cross product of threat,

vulnerability and consequence [37]. Threat is defined as the probability of a terrorist

attack. One can extend this definition to specify the time frame, the location, type of

weapon used and the terrorist groups involved in the attack. Nevertheless, this is the

component of risk that the US administration has relatively less control. Vulnerability is

the probability of damage given that a terrorist attack occurs. Damage can take any

form stated in the border security objective statement, as well as other consequences for

which a widely accepted measure does not exist. Consequences are simply the expected

2 Department of State website, www.state.gov

http://www.state.gov/
Page 3 of 33

damage inflicted from a successful terrorist attack. Following this definition of risk, the

goal in this paper is to discuss what constitutes threat in maritime domain and

vulnerabilities that could potentially be exploited by a sophisticated adversary.

Consequence assessments are beyond the scope of this paper.

2. Threats in the Maritime Domain

Terrorism threat from the maritime domain may come in various forms. For example,

weapons or explosives may be concealed in containers, ships may be used as weapons

to destroy critical infrastructure, or terrorists may illegally cross the borders to launch

attacks in the homeland. Terrorists have a wide array of options, which could culminate

into a catastrophic attack. They have already shown their capacity to operate in open

seas successfully for other non-terrorism purposes: piracy, illegal smuggling of

contraband, and illegal human trafficking across the borders. Therefore, they may

utilize the expertise in other forms of maritime crimes that has accumulated over the

years to launch more damaging attacks exploiting vulnerabilities in the global maritime

system. Accordingly, increased capability to respond to each terrorist activity may

prove to be very valuable, and require cooperation between nations.

2.1 PIRACY

Although historically not intertwined with terrorism, piracy is reemerging as a serious

threat to impede conduct of global business. In 2003, there were 445 attacks in which

21 crew members were killed, 71 reported missing, and 359 were taken hostage 3 . The

number of attacks dropped to 325 in 2004 with an increase in the death toll from 21 the

previous year to 30. Actual figures may be far more disturbing. Shipping companies

tend to underreport the incidents due to fears of increasing insurance premiums and

lengthy investigations that may result in loss of reputation. As Singapore’s Deputy

Prime Minister, Tony Tan, said, “piracy is entering a new phase; recent attacks have

been conducted with almost military precision. The perpetrators are well-trained, and

have well laid out plans.” [24] Annual cost of lost cargo has risen to $16 billion, mainly

due to piracy, truck hijacking, and theft around the ports.

Pirates have excelled in hijacking ships over the years. Once the ship is hijacked,

“turning it into a phantom ship, erasing its original identity, is relatively easy” [4]. The

ships are then known to be painted at remote docks and given a completely new

identity. A relatively simple way to do this is getting a new registry by changing flags

3 Annuals statistics released by International Maritime Bureau (IMB).