"Guess what doesn't get screened by airlines? Diplomatic pouches"

Wednesday, September 14, 2005

Guess what doesn't get screened by airlines? Diplomatic pouches.
Security experts worry that terrorists could exploit the protected status of
these bags.
By Alexandra Marks
The Christian Science Monitor 


WASHINGTON - Despite the intense scrutiny of airline passengers and their
bags since 9/11, potentially explosive gaps still exist. 

Top among them, for some analysts, are diplomatic bags - the privileged
cargo that is given special immunity.
 
Security experts worry that terrorists could exploit the status of
diplomatic pouches, which are protected from being opened or detained in any
way by the Vienna Convention of 1961. In the past, rogue countries and
individuals have used such bags to transport drugs, arms, and cash - and
even to smuggle people. That's because a diplomatic pouch can be a crate big
enough to carry a large desk.

Some security experts say it's "only a matter of time" before terrorists
aligned with a rogue nation - or a dissatisfied diplomatic employee in a
friendly one - find a way to abuse the privilege. To prevent that, a growing
number of security experts, along with some diplomatic scholars, are calling
for the United States and the international community to revisit the
sanctity of diplomatic pouches.

The issue is gaining ground as the International Civil Aviation
Organization, which sets global aviation standards and best practices,
prepares to review its security guidelines later this month.

"The US needs to take the lead in saying this is a vulnerability that needs
to at least be explored," says aviation security analyst Andrew Thomas of
the University of Akron in Ohio. "Putting our heads in the sand and acting
like it's still 1961 in a post-9/11 environment is just not the way to go."

But advocates of more tabs on diplomatic pouches have found an unlikely
opponent - the US government itself. The State Department has consistently
opposed screening diplomatic bags. "We support [the Vienna Convention] as it
stands," says spokesman Noel Clay. That's because it doesn't want American
diplomatic pouches screened when they are used overseas. The department
worries such a move could compromise the nation's international intelligence
operations, Mr. Clay says.

That view is shared by many in the intelligence and foreign affairs
communities. The logic is based on preserving the integrity of the Vienna
Convention, says Alfred Rubin, professor emeritus of international law at
Tufts University's Fletcher School in Medford, Mass. So, if the US insists
on screening another country's diplomatic bags, then the US would be
vulnerable to the same treatment.

"Then American diplomatic pouches can presumably be examined and X-rayed or
opened by our Latin American and African neighbors, and America doesn't want
that," says Professor Rubin. "But I do think we have to explore the
options."

Advocates of diplomatic bag screening contend there are ways to protect
diplomatic protocol and at the same time increase aviation security. For
instance, countries could ferry sensitive documents and technology on their
own military aircraft.

"Because of the historical record of state sponsorship of and complicity
with terrorism, it's certainly something that should be discussed,
especially when it comes to nonintrusive means of checking," says Prof.
Robert Lieber of Georgetown University in Washington.

Since 9/11, the Canadian government has implemented a policy that allows it
to request examination of a diplomatic pouch if it has reason to believe the
contents are suspect. "If the process is unsuccessful, [they can] deny
transportation of the bag," e-mailed Vanessa Vermette of Transport Canada in
response to a question.

Asked if the US has a similar policy in place, Clay of the State Department
did not answer directly with a yes or no. "Diplomatic pouches are inviolable
under international accords," he says. "We expect that host countries will
obey the uses of the diplomatic pouch and institute reasonable precautions
to ensure they're used only as intended."

But there is a long history of diplomatic pouches not being used as
intended. For instance, in 1984, British authorities found a former Nigerian
government minister who'd been abducted and drugged in a large diplomatic
crate bound for Nigeria from the Stansted Airport. Also in the crate was a
man who was conscious and equipped with drugs and syringes, according to the
the July 1985 issue of The American Journal of International Law. Three
people were arrested and charged, one of whom claimed diplomatic immunity.

When asked recently if the issue of diplomatic bag screening should be
revisited, Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff demurred. "There's a
lot of law and custom and treaty obligations with respect to this matter,"
he said at a Monitor breakfast. "We do want to be mindful of all kinds of
threats, but we want to operate within the treaty obligations we have."


 Do you have an opinion about this story?
Share it with other readers in our CAA Discussion Forums

http://www.californiaaviation.org/dcfp/dcboard.php


*****************************************