Posted on 03/10/2006 2:21:04 PM PST by Stellar Dendrite
The U.S. House of Representatives will forge ahead with a vote on blocking an Arab-owned company from managing U.S. ports, to ensure the firm sheds its U.S. holdings as promised, a leadership spokesman said on Friday.
The Republican-run House's refusal to back away from the showdown vote was another blow to President George W. Bush, who suffered a stinging defeat on Thursday when Dubai Ports World said it intended to back out of the deal his administration had approved.
Reverberations from the political earthquake continued on Friday. The United Arab Emirates broke off talks on a free trade pact with the United States, although a spokeswoman for the U.S. Trade Representative's office said delays are common.
Bush said he was concerned the opposition sent a worrying message to Middle East allies.
"In order to win the war on terror, we have got to strengthen our relationships and friendships with moderate Arab countries in the Middle East," Bush told newspaper editors.
State-owned Dubai Ports World surrendered to unrelenting criticism from both Republicans and Democrats in giving up the management of some terminals at six major U.S. ports.
The UAE company said it would transfer the ports to a U.S. entity at the behest of Dubai's ruler, to allay concerns the deal posed a threat to American national security. Details of the transfer were not outlined.
The White House had hoped the announcement would resolve the unprecedented crisis between Bush and a Congress run by his own party in open revolt.
But Ron Bonjean, spokesman for House Speaker Dennis Hastert, said the House vote on a provision to bar the deal would go ahead on Wednesday or Thursday anyway.
"It's a smart move to keep it (the legislation) in there, in case the Dubai thing doesn't work out," he told Reuters.
NATIONAL SECURITY
The outlook for a Senate vote was less clear. Senate Republican leaders have been trying to avoid one in the near future. Deal critic Sen. Charles Schumer, a New York Democrat, wants more information from the White House.
"If things are as they appear, this is a great victory for national security. But make no mistake, we are going to scrutinize this deal with a fine-tooth comb to make sure the separation between American port operators and Dubai Ports World is complete and security is tight as a drum," he said.
Dubai Ports Chairman Sultan Ahmed Bin Sulayem, asked if the firm would sell the U.S. port management rights, told Reuters: "All this is being worked out by our parties in the States."
But David Hamod, president of the National U.S.-Arab Chamber of Commerce, said it would be hard to find a U.S. company to step in.
"The advantage that the overseas company has is economies of scale. They're doing this on a global level and so it will be very difficult to find a U.S. company in this business large enough to take over the operations," Hamod said.
He also said his group was hearing calls for retribution, including keeping Americans out of Arab markets. "But it's a tiny minority of people who are arguing that," he said.
Bush, who had vowed to veto efforts to block the deal, praised the UAE as a committed ally in the war on terrorism.
"I'm concerned about a broader message this issue could send to our friends and allies around the world, particularly in the Middle East," Bush said.
Treasury Secretary John Snow said his department's lawyers were in contact with DP World about its intentions. He also said the political furor was an isolated case, as he tried to limit damage to the U.S. free-trade image.
Larry Sabato, a political science professor at the University of Virginia, said congressional Republicans are running away from Bush this election year.
"In a way, the port deal was a godsend to them," Sabato said. "It allowed them to put a lot of daylight between themselves and a very unpopular president."
A new poll Friday registered another low of 37 percent in Bush's approval rating.
(Additional reporting by Thomas Ferraro, Doug Palmer and Tim Ahmann)
Trust, but verify.
One problem-
I no longer trust a Republican Majority to prevent a political impeachment.
I have no faith in them at all.
Their actions this past couple of weeks of stripped that from me.
I have a hard time seeing how they'll regain it. Without trust in the basic assumption they wouldn't impeach the President of their own party over a bad poll....which I now believe they would if they thought they'd lose power...No, sorry, I will not help them be re-elected.
Without Trust in them, I see no reason to support them.
All of these promises, and so little time. I was stuck in Europe until September 17th, 2001. Why the rush to consummate a deal? Suddenly every Islamic regime is required relations, or else we are DOOoomed.
The chances of the Republican majority impeaching President Bush is absolutely 0%; but let me go further with you and assume that it is 50%, however the chances of a democrat majority in the house impeaching President Bush is absolutely 100%. I will go with the Republican majoirty anytime.
The problem exactly. Doubt the answer is leaving ourselves more at the mercy of a country that subscribes to the very ideology that we're fighting against.
" Congress to UAE: Can You Hear Me Now? "
The GOP controlled congress has IMPLODED. I know in politics a "LIFETIME" can be a week or vice-versa but I believe there is no way to pull out of this in time for Nov.
Rangel as WAYS & MEANS, CONYERS as JUDICIARY and Ligosi Pelosi as Speaker ensures the impeachment of the President.
In my 6 decades plus I have only seen the political landscape like this ONCE and it resulted in a Republican President's resignation and the denuding of the GOP until the Great Communicator appeared on the scene. Don't count on a savior this time!
The past two years have been the most politically charged in my lifetime. Sadly a good man and a fearless leader may pay the ultimate political price at the hands of his own party.
You will not find the costs of this debacle there. The costs are in the message to the region, the business that won't be awarded to US companies, the potential increased higher risks to our military assets including the men and women on leave in the UAE, the protectionism that is growing in this country, the higher costs and risks of a less well suited operator that DPW sells to, etc. etc. etc.
I have only read the first 50 posts...will finish in the morning. First, let me just say, this disturbed me the most.....
congressional Republicans are running away from Bush this election year.
"In a way, the port deal was a godsend to them," Sabato said. "It allowed them to put a lot of daylight between themselves and a very unpopular president."
I agree with sleuth! Time to make a list, a SHORT list...who has NOT stabbed THE President in the back? Grrrrrr
Prolly, I usually do.
They are a separate branch of government and it is they who are closest to the people.
It is their duty to to listen to those who sent them up there not to rubber stamp everything the President wants even if he is a member of their own party.
I only wish they had done their job when Clinton sold out our missile technology and security to Red China .
"In a way, the port deal was a godsend to them," Sabato said. "It allowed them to put a lot of daylight between themselves and a very unpopular president."
I guess all repubs aren't interested in political suicide. Hopefully enough to retain control of the House.
But with their leader still publically defiant to the will of the people on this issue, it may not be enough to get the job done.
Are we a high-school student campaigning for 'most popular' here, or a nation at war? We've jumped the gun with the whole 'hearts-and-minds' campaign in the ME. If we take a look back on past successful military campaigns, there was a pattern:
1) Identify the enemy 2) Sever supply lines, vital infrastructure, and all sources of support 3) Engage enemy forces 4) Demoralize civilians 5) Obtain a signed surrender from leadership 6) Help with the rebuilding process
These things are in order for a reason. They have to fully capitulate first before we can win their respect. If they don't respect us, we're just asking for trouble later. Don't confuse greed or need with respect. Kindness is then taken for weakness rather than what it is.
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.