Posted on 02/22/2006 6:19:30 PM PST by iPod Shuffle
Arab Co., White House Had Secret Agreement
Feb 22 9:03 PM US/Eastern
Email this story
By TED BRIDIS
Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON
1d08c5bfc6d0@news.ap.org The Bush administration secretly required a company in the United Arab Emirates to cooperate with future U.S. investigations before approving its takeover of operations at six American ports, according to documents obtained by The Associated Press. It chose not to impose other, routine restrictions.
As part of the $6.8 billion purchase, state-owned Dubai Ports World agreed to reveal records on demand about "foreign operational direction" of its business at U.S. ports, the documents said. Those records broadly include details about the design, maintenance or operation of ports and equipment.
The administration did not require Dubai Ports to keep copies of business records on U.S. soil, where they would be subject to court orders. It also did not require the company to designate an American citizen to accommodate U.S. government requests. Outside legal experts said such obligations are routinely attached to U.S. approvals of foreign sales in other industries.
"They're not lax but they're not draconian," said James Lewis, a former U.S. official who worked on such agreements. If officials had predicted the firestorm of criticism over the deal, Lewis said, "they might have made them sound harder."
The conditions involving the sale of London-based Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Co. were detailed in U.S. documents marked "confidential." Such records are regularly guarded as trade secrets, and it is highly unusual for them to be made public.
The concessions _ described previously by the Homeland Security Department as unprecedented among maritime companies _ reflect the close relationship between the United States and the United Arab Emirates.
The revelations about the negotiated conditions came as the White House acknowledged President Bush was unaware of the pending sale until the deal had already been approved by his administration.
Bush on Tuesday brushed aside objections by leaders in the Senate and House. He pledged to veto any bill Congress might approve to block the agreement, but some lawmakers said they still were determined to capsize it.
Dubai Port's top American executive, chief operating officer Edward H. Bilkey, said the company will do whatever the Bush administration asks to enhance shipping security and ensure the sale goes through. Bilkey said Wednesday he will work in Washington to persuade skeptical lawmakers they should endorse the deal; Senate oversight hearings already are scheduled.
"We're disappointed," Bikley told the AP in an interview. "We're going to do our best to persuade them that they jumped the gun. The UAE is a very solid friend, as President Bush has said."
Under the deal, the government asked Dubai Ports to operate American seaports with existing U.S. managers "to the extent possible." It promised to take "all reasonable steps" to assist the Homeland Security Department, and it pledged to continue participating in security programs to stop smuggling and detect illegal shipments of nuclear materials.
The administration required Dubai Ports to designate an executive to handle requests from the U.S. government, but it did not specify this person's citizenship.
It said Dubai Ports must retain paperwork "in the normal course of business" but did not specify a time period or require corporate records to be housed in the United States. Outside experts familiar with such agreements said such provisions are routine in other cases.
Another thing...a Republican Senator (King) was just on O'Reilly/FOX saying that the entire "process" consisted of Cabinet members (including Rice) asking Intelligence if they had a file on ______, and that was about it.
Complete 911 Timeline: The hunt for bin Laden
February 1999: Bin Laden Missile Strike Called Off for Fear of Hitting Persian Gulf Royalty
Intelligence reports foresee the presence of bin Laden at a desert hunting camp in Afghanistan for about a week. Information on his presence appears reliable, so preparations are made to target his location with cruise missiles. However, intelligence also puts an official aircraft of the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and members of the royal family from that country in the same location. Bin Laden is hunting with the Emirati royals, as he did with leaders from the UAE and Saudi Arabia on other occasions (see 1995-2001). Policy makers are concerned that a strike might kill a prince or other senior officials, so the strike never happens. A top UAE official at the time denies that high-level officials are there, but evidence subsequently confirms their presence.
[9/11 Commission Report, 3/24/04 (B)] People and organizations involved: Osama bin Laden
OK...wtf. Too many versions of "the facts" floating around. This is complicated enough without all the spin and political bs. The media has completely failed to get this straight, and you can see the results. What do we know for sure here? Put all the emotion and innuendo aside.
Although I don't agree with the President about a guest worker program that includes illegal aliens, I can't help but think Congress makes the laws and funds the results and should be doing what many seem to think is solely the executive's branch's responsibility.
some of you are sheep. We went into Iraq simply because Saddam tried to kill the Bush Family, specifically Bush's dad back in 91. I still dont buy the whole WMD thing. Call me liberal, I don't care. Look at N. Korea, Iran, and Syria who far outfund Iraq in terror funds and weapons development. Quit being so level headed people. I am conservative, but I don't think Bush is all that conservative, look he hangs around Clinton now, all the time... its pathetic. Both sides are the same, they just bitch over who gets funding thats what it boils down to.
No.
They are both total sell outs to the new world order globalists!!
OK, could I just get The List of all the countries we are no longer going to do business with? Just so in the future we can consult The List, and then we'll know why we're not getting anywhere in the War on Terror because we're only engaging with our pals, and not trying to bring folks over to our side.
"Secrecy is the keystone of all tyranny. Not force, but secrecy . . . censorship. When any government, or any Church for that matter, undertakes to say to its subjects, "This you may not read, this you must not see, this you are forbidden to know," the end result is tyranny and oppression, no matter how holy the motives. Mighty little force is needed to control a man whose mind has been hoodwinked; contrariwise, no amount of force can control a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything--you can't conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him."
Robert Heinlein-- "Revolt in 2100"
I didn't. Did you read the Byrd Amendment?
Amendments. Section 837(a) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1993, called the "Byrd Amendment," amended Section 721 of the Defense Production Act (the "Exon-Florio provision"). It requires an investigation in cases where:
the acquirer is controlled by or acting on behalf of a foreign government;
I certainly wouldn't have any problem with a more thorough and geater detailed investigation before it's finally given a thumbs up or down, if that hasn't been done yet.
Actually, the deal IS extraordinary in the sense that the U.S. has never engaged a state-operated/owned business in this degree of effort before. In that regard, we are selling to the UAE by selling to their state-owned/controlled business.
And, the deal IS extraordinary in the sense that this foreign state, known to associate in some fashion with terrorists (they recognize the Taliban, they do not recognize Israel, they have laundered and probably still are money for terrorist groups, they are known to traffic in weapons, and more) will be keeping all records in the UAE, not within the U.S. as to their operations here, and that they will have access to U.S. national security information that is privileged and classified and otherwise possible to be compromised by...terrorists.
These are not hysterical questions but realistic and very important ones to ask. The "physical operations" involve highly specific port, shipping and security information, along with access to the interior of the U.S. via shipping by service and goods.
It's a COMPANY owned by the UAE if you want to get really technical.
BTW, seeing how UAE have been allies in the WOT, are you accusing the Administration of being a collaborator?
Oh, ok, just checked the top--this IS "FR"...
And, this is one case where I believe it's quite necessary and very good that the Longshoreman's Union is concerned. They're looking at being under the supervision and/or at the employ of the UAE in all it's qualities.
Thanks! Enjoyed your comments here, too.
What you cited was in effect from 1988 . The Byrd Amendment in '93 added more "triggers" to start an investigation.
And, my guess is that UAE has been aggressive against the WOT.
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.