Then DPWorld, IMO, has the right to seek restitution or they could mothball the assets and infrastructure.
Anyway it doesn't set up good precedent. Who wants to sign a contract that can be yanked willynilly due to political hyperbole or graft.
Depends on how the clause it written. Probably not. And if so oh well, national security trumps business interests everytime.
I am still waiting to find out what country you actually live in. Obviously, not the United States.
If so, I don't mind that you're willing to put your pocketbook ahead of US national security. After all, it's not your problem.
I do have a problem with your pretending to be "just of of us".
I once worked for a gov. contractor and the contract had a clause that allowed the gov. to declare it null and void if the company was sold and they did not like the new owners. No reason needed.
Seek restitution from whom? When companies seek to buy out others, it is always contingent on regulatory approval. The United States requires it, Europe requires it, everyone requires it. Look, if a person goes out and purchases a popular established bar and then isn't able to secure a liquor license in his own name, the new owner doesn't get to sue the licensing board for breech of contract.