Question 1
Over the years, criminal activities have been on a trajectory rise due to the availability of technology and internet services across the entire globe. The United States of America has been one of the countries that have been targeted by terrorist activities due to the involvement in various peacekeeping missions that have rubbed some countries such as Iraq and Afghanistan the wrong way (Wankhede, 2019). As a consequence of Military intervention, radicalized groups have launched scathing attacks on the US, with the most prominent attacks being the 9/11 attacks. Due to the growing attacks, there has been growing concern about the security of ports around the US that play an instrumental role in exporting and importing goods. Homeland security has, over the years, beefed up security by employing port FSOs that are tasked with preventing and mitigating any criminal activities such as terrorist attacks.
The move to employ more port FSOs was informed by a series of the meeting by the senate and congress committees on security after which they found out that the ports of the US were under threat of terrorist attacks (Wankhede, 2019). The move to employ port FSOs was informed by various reports that cited domestic and international risks of terrorism on ports due to the fact that the marine industry was a vulnerable gateway to terrorists. Also, the ports a fundamental role in bringing goods to the US, which earns the country import duty tax that is critical in the sustainability of the economy. In retrospect, the port FSO are mandated by the law to develop, revise and implement policies that help in preventing any terrorist activities in maritime operations. The operations of port FSOs are guided by official written materials that include Security and Accountability for Every Port (SAFE Port Act) of 2006, the Customs-Trade Partnership against Terrorism (C-TPAT), the Maritime Transportation Security Act (MTSA) and the International Ship and Port Facility Security (ISPS) Code.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The Safe Port Act of 2006 is one of the bills passed by the US senate to ensure that the government counters domestic and international risks associated with tourism. The Act is basically designed to ensure that all ports around the US have an enhanced capacity of security to handle all the imminent dangers from a terrorist group such as Al-Qaida (Yunos & Sulaman, 2017). One of the many strengths of the Act is that it directs the secretary of Homeland security to acquire and create a program for the use of equipment that ensures that all the containers in the port are examined at all levels. The main focus of the Act is on the incoming goods from countries, especially in the Middle East, where the scale of terrorism is considerably high.
The Maritime Transportation Security Act (MTSA) encourages the use of technology in the detection of lethal objects that may be trapped in containers. One of the basic technology that is recommended by the Act is the deployment of radiological technology that has the ability to view all kinds of goods trapped in a container without necessary having to open not unless the container unless there is a need for physical examination (Yunos & Sulaman, 2017). Also, the Act recommends the use of nuclear technology in detecting explosives and ensuring that the process of managing security is more effective. However, the Act needs to be improved in the future by recommending the department of homeland security to use emerging forms of technology such as artificial intelligence and machine learning in providing a thorough assessment of the containers.
Moreover, The Customs-Trade Partnership against Terrorism (C-TPAT) requires greater coordination between the federal and state security agencies in preventing and thwarting any suspected terrorist activity in marine operations (Tinnes, 2016). Additionally, the use of credible and competent private security firms is highly encouraged by the Act to complement the efforts of port FSO. However, Congress needs to amend the Act to develop a framework that provides how the federal and state government should work in tandem to averse the risk of terrorism around the country.
As much as the Safe Port Act of 2006 helps in boosting the security preparedness around the country, the Act has a number of shortcomings. One of the weaknesses of the Act is that it promotes the use of radiology and nuclear technology, which is harmful to security port officials (Tinnes, 2016). Over the years, studies have shown that prolonged exposure to radiology rays destroys body cells and damages vital body tissues. The Act fails to provide a mechanism for reducing the risks that surround the use of radiological technology. Also, the Act fails to provide some form of compensation to port FSOs whose health is compromised in the process of deploying a security apparatus in the ports.
The International Ship and Port Facility Security (ISPS) gives guidelines on the tracking of all containers that are en route to the US ports. The Act requires the port FSOs to liaise with the international cargo shipping company to leverage technology and track all the containers from around the world that are destined to the US (USCG, 2017). The Act requires a security apparatus to develop other standards of monitoring the flow of cargo into the US ports. Besides, the automation of all port operations around the ports to ensure that it is much easier to track the flow of containers from the ports to the different companies that own them around the US.
Question 2
The Maritime Transportation Security Act (MTSA) provides that various ports around the US with guidelines for ensuring that all maritime operations, including ports and waterways, are safe and secure from any terrorist activities (Argomaniz, 2015). Due to the complexity of ensuring that all the security protocols are followed to latter, the federal and state government under MTSA established The Area Maritime Security Committees (AMSCs) to ensure that all guidelines, procedures stipulated in MTSA are followed by various security officials and the shipping personnel.
One of the critical roles of AMSCs is to prepare a contingency plan that relates to the security of the ports that handle both domestic and international cargo. A contingency plan is a critical element that ensures there are adequate measures that help ports to resume operations after a terrorist attack (Argomaniz, 2015). In other words, a contingency plan is basically a plan B that is developed to act in the event plan A. The process of developing a contingency plan is a complex process that requires various stakeholders drawn under the committee. Also, the committee is mandated to review the contingency plan periodically.
Moreover, AMSCs has an obligation to develop and improve communications in the vast maritime sector. The committee is mandated by law to identify the most suitable communication channel to use (Argomaniz, 2015). It is imperative to note that the imports and exports through the ports help to sustain the economy of the US by enabling the country to grow its GDP. Additionally, the committee is responsible for leveraging technology to inculcate new methods of communication. An excellent example of how the committee has improved communication in the ports is by instructing port officials to have social media accounts where they can pass various information and data concerning the various subject matter. Besides, the AMSCs monitors all the emergency telephone number are reliable and that people in various ports and report terrorism or crime-related incidences in the hotline numbers.
Furthermore, the AMSCs play an integral role in creating a synergy between the public and private sectors. Maritime operations entail multifaceted activities that cut across the public and private sectors. Notably, the private sector has companies that deal with logistics, and the public sector, through port FSOs manages all the activities of the port, such as imposing exercise and import duty as well as ensuring that the ports are safe for use (CTPAT, 2020). The AMSCs brings together the two vital sectors to come up with various measures that are instrumental in shaping the security fundamentals of the port. The representatives of the committee are drawn from police officers, academia, maritime officials, and federal government officials.
Additionally, the Area Maritime Security Committees are not only mandated to handle issues that relate to terrorism but also all the threats that are most likely to affect the maritime operations of all ports in the US (CTPAT, 2020). The committee members have the responsibility of identifying risks by classifying the threats into either human-made and natural threats. The human-made threats that are most likely to interfere with the port operations include criminal activities such as robbery, murder and terrorism.
On the other hand, the Area Maritime Security Committees identify some of the natural threats such as earthquakes, floods and hurricanes. Once the committee has identified the threat, it has the obligation of developing mechanisms and policies of mitigating and preventing the threats before they strike to ensure that all the port activities continue with regard to the stipulated maritime operations (Eski, 2016). Therefore the committees have the responsibility of continuously improving the security of all the ports in the United States of America.
Nonetheless, the committee plays an instrumental role in detecting and preventing the infiltration of nuclear objects to the US. It is beyond reasonable that the US has enemies spread across the world due to the economic and military power that the country has (Eski, 2016). Additionally, America influences various world policies, such as nuclear and military agreements. Therefore the country is bound to receive attacks that result from the infiltration of nuclear weapons that are capable of killing thousands of people and destroying properties worth billions of dollars. The committee is mandated to leverage technology that detects any nuclear materials in the containers and forward reports to the port FSOs and the department of homeland security.
On the other hand, there are certain areas within the security regime that the committee can work closely to ensure that it maintains secure maritime operations. The committee should work closely with the department of homeland security to ensure that it identifies the fundamental areas that are more susceptible to terrorist attacks. In retrospect, the committee should organize periodic meetings with the secretary of state security to look at the different avenues that the port security can receive additional funding to acquire sophisticated machines for security purposes.
Another critical area that the committee should explore and work closely in the private sector. Notably, the private sector is responsible for over 60% of the total activities of maritime operations. The private sector has crucial information that can lead to the apprehension of people that are regarded to be a national security threat since they interact with millions of people across the world (Crowell, 2018). Also, the private sector can be used as a conduit of transporting terrorists or materials that are bound to cause destruction of proportional magnitude. The private sector should be involved in all decision-making procedures to ensure that the policies developed to capture all the elements of security within all ports and prevent domestic and international terrorist activities.
Question 3
The technology field is one of the fast-growing industries around the world that keeps growing. The growth of information technology has increased the efficiency of marine in the US by reducing the time that is taken to clear a container as well as increasing the number of exports that the US exports, hence growing the overall revenue generation of the sector (Crowell, 2018). However, as the use of information systems has continued to grow tremendously, there have a number of challenges that coupled the sector. One of the biggest challenges of the use of information systems such as internet services and computing devices in the maritime sector is cyber terrorism.
Notably, maritime cyber terrorism can be defined as the illegal intrusion of the data, information and computing systems that are used to facilitate port activities around the US. It is imperative to note that the US maritime sector has embraced technology by digitizing all activities and automating the process of receiving and sending containers outside the country (Jarvis, Macdonald & Whiting, 2015). The use of softwares and programs to manage the activities of the port have been wieldy affected by stealthier measures that unauthorized personnel have managed to create to compromise the whole systems by corrupting, deleting and distorting the information stored in the data system. Maritime cyber terrorism is a concept that has widely grown since the inception of internet services in the early 1990s.
The maritime sector in the US is susceptible to attacks since it forms part of the critical infrastructure. Any interruption of the cybersecurity framework causes a disturbance of the entire economy of the US since the country mainly depends on imports to source raw materials that are vital in running factories. Additionally, ports employ thousands of workers in and outside the US, which makes them an essential part of the economy (Lagouvardou, 2018). Therefore, when cyber terrorists attack the information systems of ports, they are able to advance the political and economic influence of the government of the US.
There are a number of examples of maritime cyber terrorism that are defined depending on how the scathing attacks are launched and conducted. Most of the attacks that affect the maritime sector are launched by amateurs, with some dangerous attackers launched by professional hackers and disgruntled employees (Lagouvardou, 2018). Despite the various mechanism put in place to secure the information technology infrastructure of ports, advancements in technology continue to expose the information systems to attacks from cyber terrorists. There are four basic types of maritime cyber terrorism that include hacking, phishing, misinformation and destruction.
Hacking is the process by which terrorists have unauthorized access to shipment services in various ports. Through hacking, attackers are able to obtain crucial information on the various destinations that a ship is supposed to take. The attackers have the capability of manipulating the coordinates of the ships by luring the crew to move to certain areas where they are able to launch attacks (Lim, 2015). Additionally, hackers have the capability of obtaining radio communication between ports and captains of ships with the view of stealing containers to fund terror activities or engage in other criminal activities such as money laundering.
The second example of maritime cyber terrorism is phishing, whereby attackers send links or emails to workers that work in ports. The email addresses used to resemble the official's mails that the ports use, which makes it difficult for port authorities to recognize (Lim, 2015). Once a person has opened the link, they unknowingly launch malware that is responsible for spying on the entire information system of the port. Some of the crucial data that is poached by attackers include the number of ships that are supposed to dock and the payment methods used by the port facilities. Attackers using the phishing method access the usernames and passwords and pretend to be port officials threatening the authenticity of data relayed to customers and port officials.
Moreover, there is the concept of misinformation in maritime cyber terrorism. When attackers have access to critical information systems such as software, they have the ability to distort the information, such as the GPS of ships (AMSC, 2020). Additionally, attackers have the ability to spread propaganda and rumors through official social media accounts that is capable of invalidating vital data such as arrival and departure time of ships. Misinformation is a terrorist tool that can be used to spread scare among US citizens. One disadvantage of misinformation is that it has the ability to spread fake news at a terrific speed without necessarily having to access computing devices and may take a long time before discrediting the fake news. The issues of spreading fake news may persist in the future since the attackers are developing new ways of beating security measures.
Nonetheless, maritime cyber terrorism is responsible for destroying information systems such as computing devices. Notably, it is very expensive to acquire computing devices since there are numerous ports spread across the entire United States (AMSC, 2020). The introduction of malware and virus has the ability to destroy the storage spaces and operating systems of the ports, a scenario that may bring the operations of the maritime industry to a halt now and in the future. Besides, the destruction of cyber facilities leads to the loss of income that is gained from the movement of containers in the ports.
References
Argomaniz, J. (2015). European Union responses to terrorist use of the Internet. Cooperation and Conflict, 50 (2), 250-268
Area maritime security committee (AMSC). (2020). United States Coast Guard . Retrieved from https://www.dco.uscg.mil/Our-Organization/Assistant-Commandant-for-Prevention-Policy-CG-5P/Inspections-Compliance-CG-5PC-/Office-of-Port-Facility-Compliance/Domestic-Ports-Division/amsc/
Crowell, B. (2018). Area maritime security committees and the maritime transportation system (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Naval Postgraduate School.
CTPAT: Customs trade partnership against terrorism. (2020). U.S. Customs and Border Protection. Retrieved from https://www.cbp.gov/border-security/ports-entry/cargo-security/ctpat
Eski, Y. (2016). The war on meaninglessness: A counter-terrorist self through an absent terrorist other. Ethnography, 17 (4), 460-479. doi:10.2307/26359147
Jarvis, L., Macdonald, S., & Whiting, A. (2015). Constructing Cyberterrorism as a Security Threat: A Study of International News Media Coverage. Perspectives on Terrorism, 9 (1), 60-75.
Lagouvardou, S. (2018). Maritime cybersecurity: Concepts, problems and models (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Technical University of Denmark.
Lim, K. (2015). Non-traditional Maritime Security Threats in Northeast Asia: Implications for Regional Cooperation. Journal of International and Area Studies, 22 (2), 135-146.
Infosec . (2020). Phishing attacks in the shipping industry. Retrieved from https://resources.infosecinstitute.com/category/enterprise/phishing/the-phishing-landscape/phishing-attacks-by-demographic/phishing-attacks-in-the-shipping-industry/#gref
Tinnes, J. (2016). Bibliography: Legal Aspects of Terrorism. Perspectives on Terrorism, 10 (4), 67-98.
USCG. (2017). SAFETY4SEA . Retrieved from https://safety4sea.com/uscg-highlights-role-of-amscs-in-cyber-security/ .
Yunos, Z., & Sulaman, S. (2017). Understanding Cyber Terrorism from Motivational Perspectives. Journal of Information Warfare, 16 (4), 1-13.
Wankhede, A. (2019). The ISPS code for ships – An essential quick guide. Marine Insight. Retrieved from https://www.marineinsight.com/maritime-law/the-isps-code-for-ships-a-quick-guide/
