The United Arab Emirates – currently taking a political beating
over a deal involving U.S. ports – is no stranger to the issue of
port security. Above: a motorboat off the coast of the capital
city of Dubai. (AP)
Posted on 02/22/2006 1:18:57 AM PST by bd476
WASHINGTON, Feb. 22, 2006
A nefarious multinational corporation secretly controlled by a hostile Arab government has engineered a covert takeover of six major U.S. ports. America is at risk of losing control of its borders and compromising national security in an entirely preventable way.
Horselips.
Never have I seen a bogus story explode so fast and so far. I thought I was a connoisseur of demagoguery and cheap shots, but the Dubai Ports World saga proves me a piker. With a stunning kinship of cravenness, politicians of all flavors risk trampling each other as they rush to the cameras and microphones to condemn the handover of massive U.S. strategic assets to an Islamic, Arab terrorist-loving enemy.
The only problem -- and I admit it's only a teeny-weeny problem -- is that 90 percent of that story is false.
The United Arab Emirates is not an Axis of Evil kind of place, it will not own U.S. ports, it will not control security at U.S. ports and there is nothing new about foreigners owning U.S. ports. Odds are higher that you'll be wounded interfering with a congressman providing soundbites than by something smuggled into a port terminal leased by Dubai Ports World.
But please: let's not let the facts get in the way of a good story. And what's wrong with a little Arab-bashing anyway?
I am no expert on ports, transportation or shipping. But it takes very little reading and research to cut through the gas on this one.
Myth #1: That an Arab company is trying to buy six American ports.
No, the company is buying up a British company that leases terminals in American ports; the ports are U.S.-owned. To lease a terminal at a U.S. port means running some business operations there -- contracting with shipping lines, loading and unloading cargo and hiring local labor. Dubai Ports World is not buying the ports.
Several companies will lease terminals at a single port. In New Orleans, for example, the company Dubai Ports World is trying to buy (P&O Ports) is just one of eight companies that lease and operate terminals.
P&O Ports does business in 18 other countries. None of them are in righteous lathers about the sale of the business to a company owned by the United Arab Emirates. Dubai Ports World already operates port facilities all over the world, including such security-slacker states as China, Australia, Korea and Germany.
Myth #2: The U.S. is turning over security at crucial ports to an Arab company.
No, security at U.S. ports is controlled by U.S. federal agencies led by the Coast Guard and the U.S. Customs and Border Control Agency, which are part of the Homeland Security department. Local jurisdictions also provide police and security personnel.
Complaints about security at ports should be directed to the federal government.
Myth #3: American ports should be American.
Well, it's too late, baby. According to James Jay Carafano of the Heritage Foundation (a place really known for its Arab-loving, soft-on-terror approach), "Foreign companies already own most of the maritime infrastructure that sustains American trade…"
At the port of Los Angeles, 80 per cent of the terminals are operated by foreign companies. Chinese companies operate more than half the terminals. So why is this suddenly a threat? After all, political outcry managed to scupper the deal a few months ago in which a Chinese company was going to take over the Unocal oil company.
Go to any port in the country and you'll be lucky to see a single giant vessel with U.S.A. on its stern. Foreign-owned airplanes fly into American airports every hour. Many U.S. companies have foreign entities among their largest shareholders.
My colleague Charlie Wolfson reports that State Department sources say Dubai Ports World already handles port calls for U.S. Navy ships from the 5th fleet for their regular port calls in the United Arab Emirates -- a pretty high measure of trustworthiness.
Myth #4: the United Arab Emirates has "very serious" al Qaeda connections.
That's what Republican Rep. Peter King says. It's also what the administration said of pre-war Iraq, but that doesn't mean it's true. I suppose you could say each and every Arab and Islamic country has al Qaeda issues, but even on that yardstick the UAE is a pretty good player and by most accounts, getting better.
Politicians have been quick to point out that two of the 9/11 hijackers were from UAE. And we're turning over our ports to them? Well, by that logic, we shouldn't let Lufthansa land in our airports or have military bases in Germany, because that country housed a bunch of the 9/11 hijackers as they were plotting.
Yes, Dubai has plenty of blood in its hands, especially as a source or courier for terror funds. But it is not a rogue state. It has been among the closer and more cooperative Arab allies for the past two years (another conspiracy theory: the U.S. is paying them off).
Some combination of these facts led the Dubai Ports deal to be approved by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States. Certainly the security of American ports is an important issue. Certainly who controls the finances of companies that lease terminals at ports is far down the to-do list of how to improve security at ports.
That has everything to do with adequate funding and proper management at the relevant agencies. Management is the responsibility of the executive branch, while funding and oversight is the job of Congress. There is scant evidence that Congress or the administration have excelled in their duties.
That's why it's so tempting for politicians of both parties to indulge in xenophobic Arab-bashing on this matter of minimal national security importance. One Republican said that regardless of the facts, the administration was politically "tone deaf" on this one. Appearance is more important than reality.
Often bipartisanship is a sign of pragmatic consensus or noble common cause. In this case it is merely a scene of a politician occupational hazard: cover-your-arse-itis.
Dick Meyer, a veteran political and investigative producer for CBS News, is the Editorial Director of CBSNews.com, based in Washington.
The United Arab Emirates – currently taking a political beating
over a deal involving U.S. ports – is no stranger to the issue of
port security. Above: a motorboat off the coast of the capital
city of Dubai. (AP)
Yeah, and didn't some of those same hijackers learn how to fly the planes in Florida? LOL. I say we ban all Floridians from working either in airports or seaports.
bttt
What disgusts me more than anything is that so many GOP politicians are running scared from the liberal press. Even Rick Santorum (who is sweating out an uphill re-election bid) is choking on his own bile to join the Democrats on this "issue" because he figures the ignorant rabble will actually buy the sound-bites they hear on their car radios that we are about to be overrun with docks full of Muslims fork-lifting A-bombs off of ships and onto waiting trucks.
This whole story has made about every politician in Washington look like racist except The President! totally hilarious!
I've been to Dubai five times, most recently five weeks ago. I used to deal with ports and shipping containers from the inland warehouse and distribution end. I know enough to know that most people with something to say on this issue don't know what they are talking about.
Good article. I have made several visits to three different ports in the UAE and security there is anything but lax. This all seems to be a tempest in a teacup.
ping
He'll be fine even if he loses on an over ride.
Political years turn these Congressional scumbags into particularly vile sacks of rancid sh*t.
Thanks for posting this - - it is one of the best articles on the ports issue that I have seen - - mainly because the writer has done a little research and is informed. Congratulations to Dick Meyer for having the integrity to avoid the lazy, knee-jerk reaction.
Stupid politicians running off at the mouth before they have the facts.
We already have troops in the UAE I believe.
I've generally kept quiet on the whole thing, since I know I don't know enough, and haven't found/made time to get really informed about it.
That said, the one thing about this, that really gives me pause, is that Jimmy Carter is for it. That's generally not a good sign.
Still, even a blind squirrel finds an acorn every now and then, maybe this is a time when Carter is right.
Sanity prevails!
When someone starts telling me this is a good idea in oppostion to the will of the people and congress, my BS-meter goes off. They are an islamic nation. Islam declared jihad on us. Islam is the state religion of Dubai.
Israel gets it. There is no peace with islam.
Yemen was a fairly friendly port once.
Knee-jerk reaction? How else are we supposed to feel? Many of us lost friends in that attack.
Would we have opened our ports for control by any country with even REMOTE ties to Hitler during the 2nd WW?
Okay. Fine. Let's just trust them.
Wake me when the dust cloud settles.
/g'night
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
