Posted on 03/09/2006 9:02:17 AM PST by prairiebreeze
Dubai is threatening retaliation against American strategic and commercial interests if Washington blocks its $6.8 billion takeover of operations at several U.S. ports.
As the House Appropriations Committee yesterday marked up legislation to kill Dubai Ports World’s acquisition of Britain’s Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation (P&O), the emirate let it be known that it is preparing to hit back hard if necessary.
A source close to the deal said members of Dubai’s royal family are furious at the hostility both Republicans and Democrats on Capitol Hill have shown toward the deal.
“They’re saying, ‘All we’ve done for you guys, all our purchases, we’ll stop it, we’ll just yank it,’” the source said.
Retaliation from the emirate could come against lucrative deals with aircraft maker Boeing and by curtailing the docking of hundreds of American ships, including U.S. Navy ships, each year at its port in the United Arab Emirates (UAE), the source added.
It is not clear how much of Dubai’s behind-the-scenes anger would be followed up by action, but Boeing has been made aware of the threat and is already reportedly lobbying to save the ports deal.
The Emirates Group airline will decide later this year whether it will buy Boeing’s new 787 Dreamliner or its competitor, Airbus A350. The airline last fall placed an order worth $9.7 billion for 42 Boeing 777 aircraft, making Dubai Boeing’s largest 777 customer.
Dubai in mid-February also established the Dubai Aerospace Enterprise, a $15 billion investment to create a company that will lease planes, develop airports and make aircraft parts to tap into growing demand for air travel in the Middle East and Asia.
The family-ruled sheikhdom may buy as many as 50 wide-body aircraft from Boeing and Airbus during the next four years, according to Aerospace Enterprise officials.
The UAE military also bought Boeing’s Apache helicopters. Meanwhile, Boeing has been in talks with the emirates to try to sell its AWACS planes.
An industry official with knowledge of Boeing’s contracts with Dubai said that the company has been involved in the emirate and that it would take a lot “to knock” those relationships.
“Nothing about the [ports] controversy diminishes our commitment to the region,” said John Dern, Boeing’s corporate spokesman. He added that at this point the company has no indication that there is or will be an impact on the company.
Any repercussion to Boeing could put House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) in a delicate position. Boeing’s decision to move its headquarters to Chicago has been seen as calculated to facilitate a close relationship with Hastert. He is against the ports deal, and his office did not return calls by press time.
Several businesses have expressed concern that the controversy over the $6.8 billion ports deal could damage trade with the UAE. Dubai is one of the seven emirates. The United States and the UAE are meeting next week for a fourth round of talks to sign a free-trade agreement. The American Business Group of Abu Dhabi, which has no affiliation with the U.S. government, said that Arabs may hesitate to invest into the United States, according to a report by Reuters.
A Republican trade lobbyist said that because the ports deal is a national-security issue blocking it would not be in violation of World Trade Agreement rules.
“In terms of them retaliating legally against the U.S. … I don’t think there are many options there,” the lobbyist said.
But when it comes to the emirates’ cooperation in the war on terrorism and in intelligence gathering, there is concern that some help may be pulled.
“If we reject the company in terms of doing the [ports] work, they are going to lose a lot of face. In the Arab culture, losing face is a big deal,” a former government official said. “We risk losing that help. It is not an empty threat.”
Dubai is a critical logistics hub for the U.S. Navy and a popular relaxation destination for troops fighting in the Middle East. On many occasions since the ports story erupted, the Pentagon has stressed the importance of the U.S-UAE relationship.
Last year, the U.S. Navy docked 590 supply vessels in Dubai, plus 56 warships, Gordon England, deputy secretary of defense, said in a Senate hearing last month. About 77,000 military personnel went on leave in the UAE last year, he added.
During the hearing, he warned about the implications of a negative decision on the ports deal: “So obviously it would have some effect on us, and I’d not care to quantify that, because I don’t have the facts to quantify it. It would certainly have an effect on us.”
Although owned by the Dubai government, the company at the heart of this controversy, Dubai Ports World, is trying to distance itself from any kinds of threats, said a lobbyist closely tracking the deal.
Another lobbyist monitoring the controversy said K Street still believes there will be a compromise that allows the Dubai deal to go through while meeting congressional security concerns, even though a bill aimed at that result, put forward by House Homeland Security Committee Chairman Peter King (R-N.Y.), was widely repudiated amongst lawmakers Tuesday.
Senate leaders have indicated that they would wait to take action until the new 45-day Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) review is completed.
Meanwhile, in London, DP World cleared the last hurdle for its take over of P&O. The Court of Appeal in London refused Miami-based Eller & Co., which opposed the deal, permission to appeal against clearances for the legal and financial measures necessary to implement the takeover.
P&O said it expects to file the requisite court orders, making the takeover terms binding on DP World, according to the Financial Times.
Elana Schor contributed to this report.
Well, excusssssse me, 1436 years, give or take a calendar rewrite or two or three dozen, but hardly a "lie".
· Name: Islam · Founder: The Prophet Muhammad ibn (son of) Abd Allah · Date of Birth: 570 C.E. · Birth Place: Mecca, present day Saudi Arabia · Year Founded: 622 C.E., Mecca · History: Islam is the third and final Abrahamic religion, after Judaism and Christianity. It is believed that the descendents of Islam can be attributed directly to Abraham. "Abraham married Sarah. Sarah had no son, so Abraham, wanting to continue his line, took Hagar for his second wife. She bore him a son Ishmael, whereupon Sarah conceived and likewise had a son, named Isaac. Sarah then demanded that Abraham banish Ishmael and Hagar from the tribe. This is where the first divergence arises between the biblical and Qu'ranic accounts. According to the Qu'ran , Ishmael went to the place where Mecca was to rise. His descendants became Muslims; whereas those of Isaac were Hebrews and became Jews." Prior to the birth of Islam in 622 C.E. the environment in the Arabian Peninsula was characterized by warring tribes, trade routes, multiple religions (Christianity, Judaism, Mysticism, Polytheism, etc.), and a general ambiance of ambiguity. All of which the Prophet had to overcome when he established a new faith. This faith, Islam, was founded based on the revelations of God as they were revealed to Muhammad Ibn Abd Allah through the archangel Gabriel. "Through a combination of divine revelation and great personal character, Muhammad brought humanity a religion that offered alternatives not only to the idolatry and bigotry of the desert Arabs, but also to the world."
Blackbird.
That wasn't my reply. Read it again. That was a reply to me.
Arabs need not apply" is the sign they see us hanging at our "front door".
I don't think that is it in totality. But yes, lets be honest, it is a sort of "profiling" due to the ethnicity of the terrorists of 9/11. To many americans, its a natural reflection (I'm one of them) whether its right or wrong. If the UAE was buying something else, I don't think it would raise that much of a ruckus. But a point of entry into the U.S., well, we can't even control our borders as it is. Remember when we intercepted the terrorists coming down through Washington State after 9/11?
Your usual level of ignorance.
Half of Arab Americans are Christian. So you cannot extrapolate from them to Middle Eastern Arabs at all.
Very articulate and succinct comment.
"Are you serious or did you just forget to add the comment?"
I did. But I forgot to put "" around the comment I was responding to. And by the inflection of your reply, it didn't go over too well. But, how would Dubai feel if 3000 UAE residents got murdered by a bunch of American College kids from Univ. of Oklahoma, and Suddenly a few rednecks from Tulsa with Stetsons showed up five years later making an offer on their port?
Not just Republican swine, all the demoRATs were against it, also. America is going to suffer from this. Now are we going to start calling for the Chicoms to be expelled from running alot of our ports?
Stating that it was tolerated and accepted even in the time of Neanderthals is not the same as the original statement you made ( "Homosexuality far predates us") to which I responded - namely, the illogic of that. It usually takes two to tango. Just a minor issue. Carry on!
Those people have been sneaky for a long, long time.
Actually it made a Partner in the WOT insulted. We need them as friends especially for the upcoming Iran War.
you meant WTO right? Americans will be sorry for what they reeped on this whole issue and the swine in congress will realize it also in time. Then when all is said and done when thousands more of our soldiers are killed because of their stupidity, they will blame it on Bush not letting this deal go through for Dubai. Hopefully the "misunderestimated" president Bush will pull another rabbit out of the hat.
I agree I hope President Bush has another plan up his sleeve. Free Republic is starting to feel like DU these days with all the bashing of our President. It's a shame.
maybe the RAt underground has infiltrated FR's ranks. This sight is disappointing now.
Go on the Rush thread today it will make you feel happy it is Friday!
You said -- "Money doesn't mean diddly if you're dead!"
But money is what finances the so-called "war on terror" -- which is supposed to keep you from being dead.
No money -- no war -- you're dead.
In case you hadn't noticed, a major part of the are for al-Qaeda and Iran (and the other Islamic whackos) is to destroy the economy, thereby destroying the ability to fight and defend -- and thus -- giving an open door for them to come in and take over (in the resulting chaos). That's their stated goal (listen to bin Laden and Islamo-fascists). Money is intimately tied up with the war. It's always been with all wars (ours and others).
Regards,
Star Traveler
P.S. -- The economy and "money" has lost a lot of wars and made a lot of people "dead".
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.