25 May 2009

Hard line

The following is extracted from the 23 May 2009 edition of “globeandmail.com”.

… The Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative, and the snarls it may cause, will be foremost on the agenda this week when Public Safety Minister Peter Van Loan meets his American Counterpart, Janet Napolitano, Secretary of Homeland Security.

While the WHTI has been well publicized, it's but one plank in a more discreet U.S. effort to build a virtual northern wall of microchips and radio waves, fibre optics and old-fashioned manpower. …

The goal is what Ms. Napolitano has termed “a real border” to keep terrorists, drug runners and illegal immigrants at bay. But there's more to it. Border experts contend that the build-up is a consequence of the Canadian government's refusal to hand over key intelligence to the Americans.

So what will this “real border” look like? Is it necessary? And is it worth it? Our commerce is being pinched as much as our amity is being tested. If the new measures prove to be anything beyond a hassle, the hurt will be felt far beyond Sarnia. …

Before 9/11, a total of 340 agents protected the entire northern border. That number has jumped to more than 1,500, and they have an array of new gadgets at their disposal, including night-vision goggles and massive gamma-ray scanners that can scrutinize an entire transport truck in seconds. In addition, more than 240 truck-sized radiation monitors have been set up to detect the makings of dirty bombs.

The high-tech measures extend to the border's vast barren stretches as well.

About 1,400 unattended ground sensors have been installed, picking up seismic activity from the lightest footstep. Also, a multibillion-dollar virtual fence called the Secure Border Initiative linking dozens of surveillance towers, motion-sensitive cameras and acoustic sensors by fibre-optic cable will eventually encircle the entire United States. …

The goal on both sides of the border is to ease the U.S. fears that suddenly appeared with 9/11, when the northern border became “just about our biggest worry,” says Stewart Baker, Homeland Security policy chief under George W. Bush.

“Our perception was that the enemy was pretty sophisticated about getting into the country. You had to assume they would take the path that would most often result in them getting into the country.” …

A deeper way of looking at this

… Canadian officials play down the charge that a stiffer U.S. border stems from our refusal to share.

“I have heard no concern at an intelligence level about the level of information-sharing with the American side,” says Mr. Van Loan, the public-safety minister. “We have a very close level of co-operation. We share the same types of concern about the same types of people.” …

But plans for this North American security perimeter faded amid Canadian trepidations, specially after overzealous intelligence co-operation led to the torture of Canadian telecommunications engineer Maher Arar in Syria.

“The problem the Canadian government has is that there's some concerns about privacy and what Canadian law will allow in terms of information-sharing,” says Christopher Sands, a border scholar at the Hudson Institute, a right-wing U.S. think tank.

“But I think Napolitano senses there is an opportunity to move toward a perimeter where, once you're in North America, there's a homogeneous level of monitoring and security all the way across the interior so that, from an American-security point of view, we're not blind in any way. If that were the case, the border would matter less. It's just a checkpoint. It would be like Europe: Once you're in, you're free to