Each year, as many as 14 million shipping containers arrive on America’s shores: imported items that drive the US economy and keep our cost of goods low. But the sheer volume of deliveries brings with it an inherent danger. Port Authorities and the Coast Guard can only open and inspect an average of 5% of all shipping containers that arrive in American ports. That translates into a 95% chance that—along with unchecked boxes of televisions and sneakers and red wine—weapons, immigrants, or even a nuclear device could make it to our shores.

Last month President Bush approved Dubai Ports World's $6.8-billion deal to run cargo operations in New York City, Newark, Philadelphia, Baltimore, Miami, and New Orleans. The president’s decision to back the Dubai deal resulted in a sudden, bitter division inside the government, and sparked a fierce debate around the world.

Until now, the six US ports in question were quietly managed by a British-based company, P&O. But P&O was bought by Dubai Ports World, a takeover which shifted American port operations to the new owners. The president approved of the new business deal, insisting American port security would still be controlled by the Coast Guard and Customs and Border Patrol. It wouldn’t be unusual for a foreign-government’s company to oversee American port operations—13 of 14 container terminals at the Los Angeles-Long Beach port complex are owned by China, Japan, Taiwan, Singapore and Denmark. But this port deal was different. Dubai Ports World is controlled by the government of the United Arab Emirates. And the UAE has a bad reputation.

The United Arab Emirates has links to the Sept. 11, 2001 hijackers, a raw fact used to immediately challenge the president’s decision to allow Dubai Ports World to run security operations in the US. The UAE was also reported as a key transfer point for smuggled nuclear components that were shipped to Iran, North Korea and Libya. In addition, the UAE refuses to recognize Israel in any official capacity, and was one of only three government entities in the world to recognize the Taliban as a legitimate ruling party.

The president stressed the UAE has been an ally in the War on Terror, and that taking the Dubai deal signifies an important partnership between Middle East and American interests. Opponents fought back with statistics that support the fact that port security in America is sorely inadequate, and that authorizing an organization with terrorist ties to run what is essentially a “house of cards” is a recipe for disaster. Though all the debate, one undisputable fact arose: The fragile state of US port security has been largely ignored.

Securing America’s ports requires a tremendous amount of money and manpower. Since the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, funding has increased 700%, but the American Port Authority says their four-year, $708 million budget is not enough: Maritime security is operating on one-fifth the dollar amount it needs to provide a proper defense in US ports, and to substantially upgrade security will require $5.4 billion over the next ten years. Until then, our ports remain under-manned and under-funded, so much so that one domestic security expert goes on record to claim insufficient security at our nation’s ports is America’s greatest single vulnerability.

Weather Dubai Ports World would operate with conscience and ethics or exploit their position may never be known. Last week, Dubai Ports World announced it would transfer its operations of American ports to a US entity, ending the congressional feuding on Capitol Hill. The deal died, but the issues it raised will not be soon forgotten. The American public now knows the severity of security issues surrounding port security.

And so do our enemies.