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.
Look at how Nebraska manages electric power.
Well duh, Bubba... You haven't told me anything I don't know. Thanks for nothing.
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.
You may be on to something.
Hannity ALWAYS questions more than nearly all others on broadcast media. Which is why I like him so much (or, at least, a large part of why I do).
I am suspect of the "overwhelming enthusiasm" about this Port Deal I hear today by the likes of O'Reilly (who is usually more pragmatic than this), Rush (ditto) and a few others, while all the REPUBLICAN Senators and a handful of Governors and Congressmen are all at least TRYING to ask these same questions, just as I have, and you and others here, elsewhere.
I suspect that there's a concerted media push by the White House to put a positive face on this issue, and, given the huge amount of profits to be had if the Port Deal goes through as is, certain interests are being pulled along toward the "hey, it's SUNNY in Dubai, it's GREAT to be in the UAE" group.
Otherwise, their lack of questioning as to obvious and very important issues (those cheering the Deal on today) is suspect. It makes no sense otherwise, is nearly spin, if not spin altogether.
In all due respect, O'Reilly and Rush, two people I've often written extensively in support of.
bttt
Well, this is one case where I'd much rather see "corporate welfare" go to American business and American employees and American infrastructure, rather than to anywhere else.
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.
cash rules everything and in the UAE they have money...
OK, so no more business with communist or muslim countries? Got it.
Want to get somewhere? Fall back on the tried-and-true WWII game plan. #1 Domestic internment. #2 Utterly defeat the enemy overseas everywhere we find him.
No need for the first, we're doing the second. UAE hasn't been a problem with that. In fact, they've been cooperating. But...we just don't like 'em, so thanks but see you later--you're not "real" allies, like England.
As I understand certain complaints and comments, unless incentivized and to a degree subsidized by the federal government, American business cannot compete with this Dubai group due to American costs, taxes and regulations and such. Thus, if it gets the Port Deal done by Americans, get it done by incentivizing and subsidizing or at least by providing incentives. I think it'd be a gain all around. Some things are worth the risk.
Speaking of secrets...
Did you know that DPW already services U.S. Naval vessels?
Did you know that Gen. Tommy Franks is for this deal?
Shhh. It's secret.
Is there a clear distinction between the terms review and investigation?
Ping me if that ever happens. I wouldn't want to miss it
"Don't like it, tough. You will lose this one...and so will Bush."
If true, then perhaps we all lose.
No problem, any time. Nice tagline!
Hmmm....verry interesting information. This is about what Republican Senator King (forgot his first name and state) said today on FOX news. His visible upset about this Port Deal as it is is that he says that he is aware of the specifics of the investigation process involved and that the extent of that investigation was that the Cabinet asked Intelligence if they had anything to report about the company and that was it. (To paraphrase.)
I'm betting that Secy. Snow had a lot of weight on this decision and that there was a larger than usual degree of assumption because of his relationship with the company -- probably by others, too (former President Bush, perhaps).
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.