Bush: Port Deal Collapse Sends Bad Message

Associated Press ^ | March 10, 2006 | LIZ SIDOTI, Associated Press Writer

[indcons]

President Bush said Friday he was troubled by the political storm that forced the reversal of a deal allowing a company in Dubai to take over take over operations of six American ports, saying it sent a bad message to U.S. allies in the Middle East.

Bush said the United States needs moderate allies in the Arab world, like the United Arab Emirates, to win the global war on terrorism.

The president said he had been satisfied that security would be sound at the ports if the Dubai deal had taken effect. "Nevertheless, Congress was still very much opposed to it," Bush said. He made his remarks to a conference of the National Newspaper Association, which represents owners, publishers and editors of community newspapers.

"I'm concerned about a broader message this issue could send to our friends and allies around the world, particularly in the Middle East," the president said. "In order to win the war on terror we have got to strengthen our friendships and relationships with moderate Arab countries in the Middle East."

"UAE is a committed ally in the war on terror," Bush added. "They are a key partner for our military in a critical region, and outside of our own country, Dubai services more of our military, military ships, than any country in the world.

"They're sharing intelligence so we can hunt down the terrorists," Bush added. "They helped us shut down a world wide proliferation network run by A.Q. Khan" — the Pakistani scientist who sold nuclear technology to Iran, North Korea and Libya, he said.

"UAE is a valued and strategic partner," he said. "I'm committed to strengthening our relationship with the UAE."

After a storm of protest in the Republican-controlled Congress, DP World announced Thursday that it would transfer six U.S. port operations to a U.S. entity. The moved spared Bush from a veto showdown with GOP lawmakers. Yet the larger issue highlighted by the DP world controversy — U.S. port security — shows no signs of going away.

"The problem of the political moment has passed, but the problem of adequate port security still looms large," Sen. Lindsey Graham (news, bio, voting record), R-S.C., said.

Republicans and Democrats alike welcomed DP World's decision to give up its aspirations to manage significant operations at the six ports, but they warned that the move doesn't negate the urgent need for broad legislation aimed at protecting America's ports.

"I'm sure that the decision by DP World was a difficult decision to hand over port operations that they had purchased from another company," Bush said.

"There are gaping holes in cargo and port security that need to be plugged," Sen. Patty Murray (news, bio, voting record), D-Wash., said.

The Bush administration also announced Friday that free trade talks with the United Arab Emirates were being postponed.

The talks, which were supposed to begin Monday, were postponed because both sides need more time to prepare, according to an announcement from the office of U.S. Trade Representative Rob Portman (news, bio, voting record). USTR spokeswoman Neena Moorjani refused to say whether the postponement was related to the controversy over the port operations.

Legislation on the issue has piled up in both the House and the Senate in the weeks since the flap over DP World erupted and divided Bush from the Republican-led Congress.

Before the United Arab Emirates-based company's announcement, the House and Senate appeared all but certain to block DP World's U.S. plan despite Bush's veto threats — a message that GOP congressional leaders delivered personally to the White House.

Facing a disapproving public in an election year, a House committee overwhelmingly voted against the plan Wednesday. And House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., and Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., warned the president in a private meeting Thursday that the Senate inevitably would follow suit.

Within hours, Sen. John Warner (news, bio, voting record), R-Va., one of the few members of Congress to back the administration's position on the issue, went to the Senate floor to read a statement from the company.

"DP World will transfer fully the U.S. operations ... to a United States entity," H. Edward Bilkey, the company's top executive, said in the statement. It was unclear which American business might get the port operations.

The White House expressed satisfaction with the company's decision.

"It does provide a way forward and resolve the matter," said Scott McClellan, the White House press secretary "We have a strong relationship with the UAE and a good partnership in the global war on terrorism, and I think their decision reflects the importance of our broader relationship."

The company's decision gives the president an out. He now doesn't have to back down from his staunch support of the company or further divide his party on a terrorism-related issue with a veto.

It was unclear how the company would manage its planned divestiture, and Bilkey's statement said its announcement was "based on an understanding that DP World will not suffer economic loss."

"This should make the issue go away," Frist said.

Even critics of the deal expressed cautious optimism that DP World's move would quell the controversy surrounding that company's plan to take over some U.S. terminal leases held by the London-based company it was purchasing.

"The devil is in the details," Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said, echoing sentiments expressed by other lawmakers.

DP World on Thursday finalized its $6.8 billion purchase of Peninsular & Oriental Steam Navigation Co., the British company that through a U.S. subsidiary runs important port operations in New York, New Jersey, Baltimore, New Orleans, Miami and Philadelphia. It also plays a lesser role in dockside activities at 16 other American ports.

The plan was disclosed last month, setting off a political firestorm in the United States even though the company's U.S. operations were only a small part of the global transaction.

Republicans were furious that they learned of it from news reports instead of from the Bush administration. They cited concerns over a company run by a foreign government overseeing operations at U.S. ports already deemed vulnerable to terrorist attacks.

Democrats also pledged to halt the takeover and clamored for a vote in the Senate. They sought political advantage from the issue by trying to narrow a polling gap with the GOP on issues of national security.

Senate Republicans initially tried to fend off a vote, and the administration agreed to a 45-day review of the transaction. That strategy collapsed Wednesday with the 62-2 vote in the House Appropriations Committee to thwart the sale.

[griswold3]

Please, don't be "Stuck on Stupid".
FYI, Dubai NOW owns the terminal LEASES. (The British court threw out the lawsuit trying to stop the buyout.) The transaction has been completed. The announcement was that the UAE company was now going to divest the US terminal LEASES in question.

[Little Ray]

Umm, I suspect that Brit companies are easily infiltrated, too. Plenty of wogs living over there - some blew up some trains and buses, remember?

I didn't like the port deal, but this DOES send a bad message - "even if you're with us in the WoT, we don't trust you if you're Arab." (Wise, perhaps, but not very diplomatic...).

[mware]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1593857/posts

[bigeasy_70118]

Because these same "conservatives" think this is a way to "get Bush" which has been their agenda since 2001.

Oh please. I voted for the guy four times. So I guess I am really out to get him. This deal stunk from the get go. And the legislative branch is well within their rights to pass a law that would provide a check on an executive branch "function".

[Coop]

Perhaps you haven't noticed, but when I cyberspeak to grown-ups I have quite a bit of substance. (See my previous posts on CFIUS, its composition, etc.)

When I speak to ignorant blowhards who proclaim how fighting global terrorism is a snap, well, see my reply to you.

[clawrence3]

It's not my fault the MSM refuses to carry the President and his press secretary's words (you should know that by now):

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/02/20060221-1.html

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/02/20060221-2.html

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/02/20060227-1.html

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/02/20060225.html

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/02/20060222-10.html

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/02/20060222-11.html

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/02/20060225-1.html

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/02/20060222-5.html

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/02/20060223-3.html

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/02/20060223-5.html

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/02/20060224-3.html

[Pit1]

BUSH = Casper Milktoast. Not the guy I voted for. He's more worried about feelings like "sending bad messages" and changing the tone in Washington DC, than doing his job.

NOT ONE VETO. WTF is that. He will go down in the record book as PolyAnnaG.

[jneesy]

A moderate arab country is kinda like a domesticated tiger......chances are its gonna turn on you the bad part is you dont know when


the moral is dont try to make a tiger something its not

[clawrence3]

Last I checked, the U.S. of A. was offering to sponsor the Hammas-contolled Palestine state - things are complicated outside your little world.

[ChinaThreat]

The UAE is one of our biggest partners in the WOT. You should read Richard Miniter's book "Shadow War". Then you might have a better understanding of how this whole shebang will negatively impact our ability to fight Al Qaeda.

In the big picture, we shouldn't be allowing foreign governments to operate our ports. But it shouldn't have been handled this way.

[thoughtomator]

In between my hysterical fits of laughter at your posts =)

[Aliska]

UAE company was now going to divest the US terminal LEASES in question.

That's the second time it two days I've been called stupid. That is my understanding that the deal is dead within the last couple days or so. It is just being replayed, and my comments were in that context.

Now they are trying to lay a guilt trip on Americans and congress people on both sides who opposed it. My comments were addressed to that.

[Cboldt]

"H. Edward Bilkey, the company's top executive"

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1581542/posts?page=642#642

[Coop]

And the legislative branch is well within their rights to pass a law that would provide a check on an executive branch "function".

Hey, we agree on something. (Frightening!) So how come the legislative branch - after the executive branch followed the exact procedure put in place by the legislative branch - then started screaming and took action to stop the deal? Hmmmmm?

"I get so emotional, baby, every time I see "Arabs!"

[Coop]

Very nice smackdown. :-)

[Txsleuth]

I sure don't want to hear Kerry and Biden complaining that President Bush doesn't reach out diplomatically to other countries for help....

He did...and got slapped down for it.

Also....look for Schmuckie to be doing the snoopy dance of joy over this in his checkbook!!

[Coop]

He's more worried about feelings like "sending bad messages" and changing the tone in Washington DC, than doing his job.

Congratulations! You've just taken a powerful lead for the coveted SPOTD award!!!

[308MBR]

I know they did. There are WAY too many similar acts which created things like the EPA, BATF, INS, DoE, Energy Dept, etc.

If the 535 members in Congress and their staffs can't handle a program directly, the feds shouldn't be doing it!

[MizSterious]

"The business deal will work out, and puppies and kittens are safe from evil unions and Emirs."

Well, I'm not so sure about unions...

[DCPatriot]

And why in the hell didn't President Bush call a press conference to make these statements BEFORE it was too late?