What Does Terrorism Have to Do With the Keystone Pipeline?

An explosion is seen as soldiers keep low in the foreground during a joint Pakistan-China anti-terrorist drill as they wrap up their two-week military exercise in Jhelum on November 24, 2011. PLA soldiers and Pakistani commandos from Special Service Group (SSG) participated in the exercise which was a display of the mutual commitment and resolve to fight terrorism, besides bolstering the ties between the two countries. 
National Journal
Clare Foran
Add to Briefcase
Clare Foran
June 4, 2014, 8:30 a.m.

The Key­stone XL pipeline is highly vul­ner­able to a ter­ror­ist at­tack.

At least that’s what op­pon­ents of the pro­ject want you to be­lieve. The pro­posed oil-sands pipeline has yet to be built, and the Obama ad­min­is­tra­tion needs to sign off on the pro­ject be­fore it can go for­ward. But en­vir­on­ment­al­ists are launch­ing a cam­paign to clas­si­fy it as a na­tion­al se­cur­ity threat. The claim opens up a new front in the pub­lic-re­la­tions arms race over the pipeline — and it’s heavy on the hype.

Nex­t­Gen Cli­mate — an or­gan­iz­a­tion backed by bil­lion­aire en­vir­on­ment­al act­iv­ist Tom Stey­er — com­mis­sioned a re­port de­tail­ing the po­ten­tial for a ter­ror­ist at­tack on Key­stone XL. The as­sess­ment is au­thored by Dave Cooper, a seni­or op­er­at­ive from the U.S. spe­cial forces team that took down Osama Bin Laden.

The re­port — re­leased Wed­nes­day — does everything it can to gin up anxi­ety that an at­tack could oc­cur, but stops short of quan­ti­fy­ing the ac­tu­al risk.

It cites “an up­tick in ter­ror­ist at­tacks against en­ergy in­fra­struc­ture around the world” to em­phas­ize the pipeline’s vul­ner­ab­il­ity. Cooper out­lines a num­ber of scen­ari­os to il­lus­trate how the pipeline’s north­ern ex­ten­sion might fall vic­tim to sab­ot­age. And he ar­gues that Key­stone’s na­tion­al ex­pos­ure could in­crease its chance of be­com­ing a tar­get. 

“Right now, know­ing the prob­lems that ex­ist, I wouldn’t put the pipe in the ground,” Cooper told re­port­ers at a brief­ing Wed­nes­day in Ar­ling­ton, Va.

In an ef­fort to raise the stakes sur­round­ing the pipeline, however, the re­port leaves out cru­cial con­text.

Here’s what it doesn’t say: While ter­ror­ist at­tacks on en­ergy in­fra­struc­ture may be on the rise around the world, ter­ror­ist strikes on U.S. soil have de­clined dra­mat­ic­ally in re­cent dec­ades. At­tacks fell from 468 in 1970 to just 13 in 2012, the latest year that data was avail­able through the Na­tion­al Con­sor­ti­um for the Study of Ter­ror­ism and Re­sponses to Ter­ror­ism at the Uni­versity of Mary­land.

Dur­ing this time, the most likely tar­gets of a ter­ror­ist at­tack in the U.S. were busi­nesses, fol­lowed by private cit­izens and prop­erty. At­tacks ten­ded to take place in urb­an areas, and non-fatal events vastly out­numbered deadly strikes.

Cooper ac­know­ledged that ter­ror­ist at­tacks on do­mest­ic pipelines have not his­tor­ic­ally been a ma­jor is­sue in the United States. But he em­phas­ized that the U.S. should take a pro­act­ive ap­proach to safe­guard­ing na­tion­al se­cur­ity, rather than wait­ing un­til a prob­lem oc­curs to take ac­tion. He also cited an as­sess­ment is­sued by the Trans­port­a­tion Se­cur­ity Ad­min­is­tra­tion high­light­ing the po­ten­tial vul­ner­ab­il­ity of do­mest­ic pipelines. 

Yet while Key­stone XL could fall vic­tim to a ter­ror­ist at­tack, the odds of that hap­pen­ing in the near fu­ture are low re­l­at­ive to po­ten­tial tar­gets and past years’ activ­ity.

En­vir­on­ment­al­ists are all but cer­tain, however, to steer clear of trends that might drain any of the ur­gency from their ar­gu­ment.

A spokes­per­son for Nex­t­Gen said that a copy of the threat as­sess­ment was hand-de­livered to a high-level State De­part­ment of­fi­cial cur­rently in­volved in the na­tion­al-in­terest de­term­in­a­tion of the pipeline on Monday. Law­makers on Cap­it­ol Hill, in­clud­ing Demo­crat­ic Sen­at­ors Bar­bara Box­er of Cali­for­nia and Mar­tin Hein­rich of New Mex­ico, were also briefed by the or­gan­iz­a­tion about the re­port earli­er in the week.

It’s not the first time the Key­stone de­bate has been wrapped up in rhet­or­ic — and it likely won’t be the last. Former Re­pub­lic­an House Speak­er Newt Gin­grich called for the pipeline’s ap­prov­al in light of the crisis in Syr­ia last fall, des­pite the fact that events abroad were not poised to sig­ni­fic­antly im­pact en­ergy se­cur­ity.

And as the quest to win the pub­lic-opin­ion battle over the pipeline drags on, en­vir­on­ment­al­ists and in­dustry have had to get more cre­at­ive. 

This story has been up­dated.

What We're Following See More »
SAYS TRUMP JUST ATTACKING REPUBLICANS
Former Top Aide to McConnell Says GOPers Should Abandon Trump
2 days ago
THE LATEST
“YOU CAN’T CHANGE HISTORY, BUT YOU CAN LEARN FROM IT”
Trump Defends Confederate Statues in Tweetstorm
3 days ago
WHY WE CARE
CEOS HAVE BEEN FLEEING FOR THE EXITS
Trump to End Business Councils
3 days ago
THE LATEST
FROM STATEMENT
McConnell: “No Good Neo-Nazis”
4 days ago
THE LATEST
NO FORMAL LEGISLATIVE EFFORT
CBC Members Call for Removal of Confederate Statues from Capitol
4 days ago
THE LATEST

"Members of the Congressional Black Caucus are reviving calls to remove Confederate statues from the Capitol following the violence at a white nationalist rally in Virginia." Rep. Cedric Richmond, the group's chair, told ABC News that "we will never solve America's race problem if we continue to honor traitors who fought against the United States." And Mississippi Rep. Bennie Thompson said, “Confederate memorabilia have no place in this country and especially not in the United States Capitol." But a CBC spokesperson said no formal legislative effort is afoot.

Source:
×
×

Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.

Login