Posted on 02/26/2006 8:25:29 AM PST by jraven
Moving toward a deal that could allow President Bush and congressional GOP leaders to save face and avert a prolonged confrontation, GOP officials said today that they were discussing the idea of having Dubai Ports World seek a new review of its acquisition of a British company's operation that runs several key U.S. ports.
House Homeland Security Committee Chairman Peter King, confirmed in a phone interview early Saturday afternoon to TIME that officials were close to a deal involving the Congressional leadership, the White House and the Dubai company. The agreement would call for a 45-day CFIUS-plus investigation, King said, referring to the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, a Treasury Department-run interagency panel that probes proposed acquisitions in the U.S.
Although the Dubai deal had already been approved by CFIUS, "the rationale for reopening it is, once DP carved out the American ports from the rest of the contract it changed the nature of the agreement so it had to be reviewed again," says King, who had been among the leading GOP voices opposing the deal as first approved without the extra 45-day review process or briefing of Congress. King says will await final details before formally backing any such deal. King added "if we are going to hold back on legislation, I think there has to be continuous congressional review throughout the new CFIUS review.
If approved by all parties, the new deal would allow Bush to avert a GOP-driven bill to overturn the Dubai deal with enough votes to override Bush's threat of his first veto. Republican sources tell TIME that Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist of Tennessee proposed the basic terms of a deal designed to give the White House a graceful way out, while also allaying the concerns of the many lawmakers in both parties who have said the deal could be a threat to our security. Under the Frist plan, the deal could stand a good chance of ultimately going through after the extended review. Frist aides apparently proposed the terms to representatives of the company and the White House late Friday. Neither has formally responded but both seemed interested in the idea, according to a Senate Republican aide. "This avoids a direct clash," the aide said. "It solves everyone's problem. The President doesn't have to cancel the deal or veto anything."
Under Frist's plan, the company would voluntarily separate U.S. ports from the rest of the deal for 45 days, allowing them to continue to operate as they do while the deal is re-vetted. That would allow a new review through the administration's Committee on Foreign Investments in the U.S. (CFIUS). Administration officials remain adamant that their first review was thorough and proper, so the face-saving element was crucial, according to one Capitol Hill negotiator. Frist is proposing that this time, CFIUS do the extra 45-day review that the law calls for in transactions where there are national security concerns. That provision was not triggered last time because administration officials had no remaining concerns at the end of the first review. This approach would eliminate the need for new legislation now, the Republican sources said.
That's a matter of opinion, I guess.
Anyway, Dubai Ports World loses either way. The Port Authority of New York/New Jersey has a clause in its lease requiring it to approve the transfer of any leases. DPW never sought that approval, and now the Port Authority is going to court to break the lease (and very likely to be able to do so, according to local reports.)
Not sure about Baltimore or Los Angeles, but I suspect local political pressure will force a similar outcome.
Local news coverage in NY has been very negative about this deal, with a lot of favorable PR for Schumer, Hillary, and the newly-appointed Senator Menendez of NJ.
Either way, DPW is not going to get the leases on these ports, and it's too bad the Republican Party is suffering for a lost cause.
I don't support appeasement.
By the way, has the UAE government publicly apologized for its role in laundering al-Qaeda money and harboring participants in the 9/11 attacks?
We are not handing over the ports, we are allowing them to lease a single terminal at 6 of our ports that we control.
It is not appeasement! We are not being forced politically and through leverage into any agreement, it is a simple business deal between two foreign corporations.
Have the U.S banks apologized for being in on this as well? Have we admitted just how many home grown terroists we have? Some of them are currently alive and well in Afghanistan and possibly Pakistan and currently working against us.
So what makes the UAE a boggy man?
You also neglect to mention what has occured since and the fact that the UAE has been our best friend in the region, with Kuwait a close second, followed by Pakistan.
I wonder if someone who leases space in a shopping mall becomes intimately familiar with the policies and procedures and security measures taken at that mall.
"I wonder if someone who leases space in a shopping mall becomes intimately familiar with the policies and procedures and security measures taken at that mall."
Exactly. I wouldn't want a Muslim government to be leasing a storefront at the Mall of America, either.
Well, I have a way of speaking out and telling the truth. If you don't like seeing the truth posted, I suggest you don't read my posts. The facts are quite clear. The UAE is a Muslim nationstate, whose citizens support Islamic jihad. The UAE did fund the 9-11 attacks, they did support the Taliban-Al Qaeda govt in Afghanistan, they did run cover for Osama Bin Laden and they have been a willing partner in terrorism for decades. Those aren't the people I want managing commercial operations of US ports of entry on the American homeland.
DPW also runs a number of terminals in China and has recently closed a huge deal in Pusan, ROK.
http://www.dpiterminals.com/subcats.asp?SubCatID=1&CatID=1
Marine Inspector is Right. Also he and I along with CWOJackson and many others canvased this issue fully on this THREAD:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1585600/posts
Our president wants to flood the middle east with US produced goods in his next phase of conquering Islamofascism, much as we did with Europe after WWII, THE DIMS KNOW IT AND WANT TO STOP HIM from succeeding.
BTW CWOJAckson was a carreer officer in the Coast Guard, and he supports this deal.
Wise up and stop getting into bed with a bunch of Dimocrat fluff heads. We have the terrorists on the run, now we must use American products to change the tide in Islamic Society, and the only way of getting those products there cheaply and in sufficient quantity is with the help of this Dubai/P&O deal!!!
Thankyou MarineInspector for taking the time to enlighten the poor MSM influenced sods on this list, they have been had and are too stubborn to admit they are on the verge of RINOism. OH YE OF LITTLE FAITH !!!!
You Xenophobes can pick up your new Tee shirts here, up until now they been selling them mostly to Wing Nut Dims:
Ah yes, the old racist card. That reminds me, I have to wash my KKK sheets tonight for the upcoming white power banquet.
Maybe you should pass this "information" on to the Navy! :^)
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/facility/jebel-ali.htm
Foreign policy by polls and media induced public opinion.
This will lead to something that could damage everything we care about, including the war, and it is all to get Bush.
When you get tired of having your strings pulled, let us all know.
Thinking does not hurt much...............
I'm sure that one of the first things they notice is what time the mall police take their coffee breaks.
I just hope that New York/New Jersey has some company that can pick up the lost import traffic and revenue, not to mention the exports. They will most likely do more harm then good.
Not sure about Baltimore or Los Angeles, but I suspect local political pressure will force a similar outcome.
I would think they do, and the same thing will happen, more damage to the economy.
Local news coverage in NY has been very negative about this deal, with a lot of favorable PR for Schumer, Hillary, and the newly-appointed Senator Menendez of NJ.
Well, if the deal gets canceled, it will only help Hillary get into the White House. I'm not convinced terrorists are worst then Hillary
Either way, DPW is not going to get the leases on these ports, and it's too bad the Republican Party is suffering for a lost cause.
Canceling the deal will cost the Republicans more in the long run.
This is a great point that I have not heard mentioned in a couple of days and, if true, needs to be reiterated over and over again.
Yes they do.
Use bleach.
Thanks for the response.
---I did my time on the left. They are they enemy. Anyone who aids and abets them is also an enemy of the America we are fighting to keep. Putting up a stink over the administration on this issue aids and abets the donks. It is just the kind of play the conservatives fall for, over and over.---
Amen! We could be beating up on the Dim instead of watching Frist try to sweep this under the carpet, but no, the Stupid Party shoots itself in the foot again...
I wonder if anyone here was opposing all the weapons we've sold the UAE over the decades. If we really can't trust them, I would think that would be worse than letting them manage some ports.
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.