Posted on 03/09/2006 5:53:50 AM PST by KJC1
DUBAI (Reuters) - Dubai Ports is pressing ahead with a takeover that gives it control of six major U.S. ports despite a Congress committee vote to block the deal, sources familiar with the deal said on Thursday.
Government and company officials in the United Arab Emirates declined comment on Wednesday's vote by U.S. lawmakers to block the deal on the grounds that handing the ports over to a Gulf Arab state-owned firm would threaten U.S. national security.
But the sources said the vote had not taken Dubai Ports any closer to relinquishing the six ports at the center of a political firestorm.
"The vote in the House of Representatives has not change anything in that respect. We are not at that point," one Dubai-based source said.
Analysts said the political furor was bound to provoke businesses in the world's biggest oil exporting region, which is an increasingly important source of financing for the huge U.S. current account deficit.
"It's American double standards. Do you think that businesses and governments here won't react and even retaliate?" said Wadah Al Taha of the National Bank of Abu Dhabi.
He said the issue was likely to feature prominently in trade talks later this month between the United States and the UAE, a federation of seven emirates that includes Dubai.
The Dubai Ports row has reinforced fears in the Middle East that investments in the United States have become politically risky for Arabs and Muslims. Some Arabs say the U.S. opposition to the deal smacks of racism.
SECURITY FEARS
Some U.S. politicians say the UAE has in the past been sympathetic to Islamist militants, noting that two of the September 11 hijackers came from that country.
President George W. Bush, however, says the UAE is a staunch ally in the U.S. war on terrorism and he has vowed to veto any legislation that would block the ports deal.
Wednesday's 62-2 vote, by the House Appropriations Committee, will be followed next week by another vote by the full House of Representatives.
Dubai Ports officials said they were pushing ahead with plans to integrate British ports group P&O which runs the U.S. ports. A Dubai Ports spokesman said the company would soon announce the de-listing of P&O now that shareholders had approved the $6.8 billion takeover.
Dubai Ports Chairman Sultan Ahmed Bin Sulayem and Chief Executive Mohammed Sharaf fly to London this week to discuss integration of the two companies which make up the world's third largest ports group.
"We are evaluating the situation," Bin Sulayem said.
The UAE is a close ally of Washington and a frequent port of call for American warships. Concerns are growing that the fallout from the ports row will affect U.S. economic ties with the Gulf.
UAE Economy Minister Sheikha Lubna al-Qassimi said last week the furor could prompt other countries to divert funds away from the United States.
American businesses in the UAE warned on Wednesday that trade worth more than $8 billion between the United States and the United Arab Emirates could be in jeopardy.
:)
Too bad we don't seem to have a Republic, and indeed it is too bad I'm not running it. You can't insult an arab as they have no pride or dignity. They are masters at "acting" insulted, but that is just to try to get the better of you in a bargain. You have to stand up to these people -- you can't be soft, you can't be sensitive, you can't be PC. That's as foreign to them as if we were from Venus. A certain amount of "Ugly Americanism" is not only necessary but expected. If they bargain and they don't get any push back at all, they'll steal the family jewels.
Only trouble is, you know that the statement you made is untrue.
Ha! Last time I checked that would be 3 words, but hey I know what you meant.
What will suck is if they do bring it on and call in our debts that they own, hassle us at other ports they operate world-wide, or ramp up anti-american rhetoric in our ally countries in the Mid-East.
And the whole "where will they sell their oil" question is silly. A lack of oil would hurt us far greater than it would hurt a rich regime that already seperates wealth from their people. What would happen to middle America? I imagine it would be worse than what would happen to an already poverty-stricken middle East.
If security is what our party is all about, well then let's proove that. Our Senators that are challenging this deal have it right. We can't let a govt-run country running our ports. Having a foreign company run them is bad enough, but we must draw the line before allowing state-run companies to do so.
"You can't insult an arab as they have no pride or dignity"
Excuse me? This sort of garbage has no place in an intelligent conversation. You have no dignity, proven by your post.
As a conservative Arab-American, I am thoroughly disgusted by your post and am ashamed to even be associated with you.
Tell the suicide bombers they have no pride. Idiot.
OK, ok, I'm sorry. I know all arabs don't have the 'rug merchant' mentality. Besides my harsh tone, and possibly insulting words, it sounds like we agree. We can't acede to a position of a foreign government that tells us we must allow them certain contracts in a security sensitive area or we will face consequences.
I think getting embargoed by OPEC is probably inevitable now. 'Bout time we faced some hardships here. Hopefully the sheeple won't fall for the line that the democrats can handle things better because they can't.
This is a deceased, Parrot!
Answer: No its not, e's merely pining for the fjords of Norway!
bttt
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.