Avoiding Another Dubai

Washington Post ^ | Tuesday, February 28, 2006 | C. Fred Bergsten

[indcons]

Nearly all objective observers of the uproar over "selling American ports to the Arabs" agree on three key elements of the situation. First, the purchase of port management operations by Dubai Ports World from a British-owned company will have no operational impact on the national security of the United States. Port owners and managers are not responsible for port security. There are risks at our ports, but they stem from the fact that the American agencies responsible for our security -- U.S. Customs and Border Protection and the Coast Guard -- examine only about 5 percent of incoming cargo, along with a modest portion of shipments at the point of export.

Mid-level officials at 12 agencies of the U.S. government, including the Department of Homeland Security and the Pentagon, reviewed the Dubai investment in considerable depth, apparently with full cooperation from the company. They unanimously concluded that there was no reason to refer it to their own superiors, let alone the president. The substance of the government's vetting process, conducted through the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), worked precisely as intended by the legislation under which it operates.

Second, that process contains a major flaw: its failure to inform Congress of pending transactions in a way that would enable lawmakers to express meaningful objections in an orderly manner. The CFIUS process is opaque and secretive, requiring after-the-fact notification of the Hill for only the very few deals that have already been acted on through the president's personal intervention. Congress can therefore express its concerns only by leaping into individual cases with great fanfare, as in the current case and, even more so, when it in effect vetoed the bid for Unocal by the China National Offshore Oil Corp. last year even before...

[CWOJackson]

Bump for an informative article.

[sit-rep]

Uh oh...talking to yourself is a sure sign bud...

[CWOJackson]

bumping for others to read. Did you read the article?

[Democratshavenobrains]

"Mid-level officials at 12 agencies of the U.S. government, including the Department of Homeland Security and the Pentagon, reviewed the Dubai investment in considerable depth, apparently with full cooperation from the company. They unanimously concluded that there was no reason to refer it to their own superiors, let alone the president. The substance of the government's vetting process, conducted through the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), worked precisely as intended by the legislation under which it operates."

So its not Bush's fault? Blasphemy!

[Cannoneer No. 4]

Face Saving On DPW Port Deal

[sit-rep]

Yes sir, I did. Not too many get by. But I still have grievance with foreign investments and arab / islamic work visas. Call me anything but late for dinner!!

[Cannoneer No. 4]

CFIUS was set up by Congress to keep Congress and politics out of the process.

[Cannoneer No. 4]

The phony fracas

[CWOJackson]

It's a good read that lays open this whole fabricated non-crisis and what's driving it. It sure has more bearing on the situation then the "Neil Bush" stuff.

[sit-rep]

So what's your point?

[sit-rep]

I never clicked into a Neil Bush link...not interested.

[Cannoneer No. 4]

We don't have 535 "Sec'ys of State"

[Cannoneer No. 4]

the Coast Guard and the entire CFIUS panel believed that this transaction, when taking into account strong security assurances by DP World, does not compromise U.S. security.

[Cannoneer No. 4]

AN ORGANIZED DISINFORMATION CAMPAIGN ON THE PORT DEAL

[sit-rep]

cmon man...I get it. from here on out, just consider me the bigot in regard to reasons why not. that will make it easier for ya.

[PhilDragoo]

I have called my two senators' DC offices, my congressman's DC office, Bill Frist and Denny Hastert's offices, and the White House Comment Line in support of the operational transfer.

The deal is security safe and economically wise. The objections to it are hysterical and ignorant--even hypocrital: viz. Senator Hillary She-Who-Must-Be-Oyveyyed.

She Who Cannot Recall cannot recall that she had no such breathless objections to foreign control of port operations when the PRC-owned COSCO was cleared for Long Beach--or when she and traitor-rapist42 pulled our Ambassador and dispatched Carville to Panama and rigged the bidding to insure Li Ka-shing COJZ (Comrade of Jiang Zemin) was cleared for control of Cristobal and Balboa flanking our BC (Before Carter) Canal.

UAE remains our ally in a region where to be such is to live dangerously. Yet we are allowed some 500 naval vessel visits annually and have the critical use of air basing--basing which will become vital when it is time for us to deprogram Mahmoud The Mahdi Knee Pad's nuclear program for the erasure of the Zionist entity.

As my poli sci department head would say, Look at a map. There is UAE on Iran's southern flank filling out the line with Iraq on the west and Afghanistan to the east.

And the UAE's proximity to the Strait of Hormuz makes our defense of that vital chokepoint doable when the Tyrants of Tehran attempt to act on their threat to shut off the oil tap.

The so-infallible congress (including Densa member Susan Collins) allowed Jamie's Wall and allowed its constructor to sit on the 911 Commission instead of being righteously bitch-slapped by it.

The brouhaha is too funny in light of the almighty congress having damaged national security beyond knowing by blandly accepting 42's failure to accept OBL from Sudan, failure to approve taking the Hellfire shot(s) September/October 2000 from the Predator with the "tallest man in Afghanistan" center-mass.

And finally, if UAE is such a threat to our national security, why did the co-Presidents Clinton sell it sixty (60) F-16s in 1998?

Hillary for national security--it is to laugh.

[CWOJackson]

Very good!

Earlier today I sent a personal letter to the UAE Embassy thanking them for being such a strong Alli in this war, and urging them to not judge America too harshly over the actions of our press and some commentators.

[Cannoneer No. 4]

GWOT: The public ain't buyin'