Roguish Lawyer
02-21-2006, 16:07
What do you guys think about this? Is the deal a domestic security threat? Would blocking the deal adversely impact relations with Middle Eastern countries and their cooperation in the GWOT? :munchin
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/02/21/port.security/index.html
Bush backs Dubai port deal, vows veto
Lawmakers seek more thorough look at takeover by UAE firm
Tuesday, February 21, 2006; Posted: 4:39 p.m. EST (21:39 GMT)
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush on Tuesday strongly defended a deal that would let a United Arab Emirates-based company run six major U.S. seaports, telling reporters that he would veto any bill to hold up the agreement.
Bush, who has yet to veto a bill during his administration, warned that the United States is sending "mixed signals" by attacking a Middle Eastern company after the American ports had been run by a British firm for several years.
Lawmakers who have called for the deal to be blocked need to "step up and explain why a Middle Eastern company is held to a different standard," he said.
The administration has faced a wave of criticism this week over its decision to let a subsidiary of maritime management firm Dubai Ports World run ports in New York and New Jersey; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Baltimore, Maryland; Miami, Florida; and New Orleans, Louisiana.
The company recently acquired the British-based firm that currently directs commercial operations at those ports, Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation. The takeover by Dubai Ports World means that it will be in charge of those operations.
"I don't understand why it's OK for a British company to operate our ports but not a company from the Middle East when we've already determined security is not an issue," Bush said.
Bush made his comments to reporters Tuesday aboard Air Force One, which he rarely does. His forceful statement came just hours after Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist urged the administration to block the deal until Congress could scrutinize it.
Frist, a Republican from Tennessee, called on the review committee that approved the deal to open its deliberations to congressional scrutiny.
"If the administration cannot delay the process, I plan on introducing legislation to ensure that the deal is placed on hold until this decision gets a more thorough review," Frist said in a written statement Tuesday.
House Speaker Dennis Hastert, an Illinois Republican, and Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, a California Democrat, also joined that call as lawmakers from both parties expressed concern over the deal.
"No one can understand it, Democrat or Republican," said Sen. Charles Schumer, a New York Democrat and a leading critic of the agreement. "Average citizens, everywhere we go, are stopping us and saying, 'What is going on?' "
Critics say the takeover raises security concerns, noting that two of the hijackers in the September 11, 2001, attacks on New York and Washington came from the UAE, and that the hijackers drew funds from bank accounts in Dubai, the financial center of the Persian Gulf.
But the Bush administration argues the deal was properly approved and poses no security threat, and that the UAE is an ally in the war on terror. (Watch what role the UAE plays in the war on terror -- 1:57)
"Nothing in this acquisition has anything to do with the responsibility for security in American ports," State Department spokesman Adam Ereli said. "That remains very firmly in the hands of the Department of Homeland Security. What we're talking about is the management of some port operations."
The agreement is scheduled to take effect March 2. It was approved by the federal Committee on Foreign Investments in the United States, which includes representatives of the Treasury, Commerce and Homeland Security departments, the FBI and the Pentagon.
Frist, a potential presidential contender in 2008, said the committee's approval process "needs to be more transparent and include a role for Congress."
"These deals could have a major impact on America's security, the protection of which is our greatest responsibility," he said in a written statement.
Bipartisan concern
Lawmakers swarmed over the issue Tuesday, criticizing the administration's approval of the contract and calling for a more extensive review.
Pelosi called for hearings into the deal "and others pertained to foreign ownership."
"In the meantime, Congress must put an immediate halt to this deal that the administration hastily approved in secret without input from the Congress or state officials and without a thorough review of how it might affect America's security," she said.
Rep. Peter King, the chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, and Schumer already have introduced a bill to put the deal on hold.
King, a New York Republican, said the UAE "has had unusual ties to al Qaeda in the past," and he called the administration's review of the decision "totally unacceptable after 9/11."
"My office today has received more phone calls on this than any issue in the 14 years I've been in the United States Congress, and every one of them is in support of what Senator Schumer and I are doing," he said.
Ereli said Homeland Security officials have had good relations with Dubai Ports World, and he said the United States has a "strong and effective partnership" with the UAE "from a counterterrorism point of view."
Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, a Florida Republican, said Congress has until March 2 "to ask a lot of questions, demand some answers and shed some light about these transactions."
And Sen. Susan Collins, a Maine Republican and the chairwoman of the Senate Government Affairs and Homeland Security Committee, said the agreement received "far less scrutiny than it should have."
"Although the UAE is an ally in the war on terrorism, the country has historically been used as a base of terrorist operations and financing," she said.
Two Republican governors -- George Pataki of New York and Robert Ehrlich of Maryland --- have indicated they may try to cancel port lease arrangements, according to The Associated Press.
A Dubai Ports World spokesman said Monday that the firm has received all the necessary regulatory approvals and that the security systems in place at the ports would only get better under the new management.
"We intend to maintain or enhance current security arrangements, and this is business as usual for the P&O terminals," the spokesman said.
A port security expert said fears that the agreement would reduce U.S. security are based on "bigotry" against Arabs and that "shameless" politicians are creating an issue they think will resonate with the public.
"This whole notion that Dubai is going to control or set standards for U.S. ports is a canard ... is factually false," said Kim Petersen, head of SeaSecure, a U.S.-based maritime security company, and executive director of the Maritime Security Council, which represents 70 percent of the world's ocean shipping.
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/02/21/port.security/index.html
Bush backs Dubai port deal, vows veto
Lawmakers seek more thorough look at takeover by UAE firm
Tuesday, February 21, 2006; Posted: 4:39 p.m. EST (21:39 GMT)
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush on Tuesday strongly defended a deal that would let a United Arab Emirates-based company run six major U.S. seaports, telling reporters that he would veto any bill to hold up the agreement.
Bush, who has yet to veto a bill during his administration, warned that the United States is sending "mixed signals" by attacking a Middle Eastern company after the American ports had been run by a British firm for several years.
Lawmakers who have called for the deal to be blocked need to "step up and explain why a Middle Eastern company is held to a different standard," he said.
The administration has faced a wave of criticism this week over its decision to let a subsidiary of maritime management firm Dubai Ports World run ports in New York and New Jersey; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Baltimore, Maryland; Miami, Florida; and New Orleans, Louisiana.
The company recently acquired the British-based firm that currently directs commercial operations at those ports, Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation. The takeover by Dubai Ports World means that it will be in charge of those operations.
"I don't understand why it's OK for a British company to operate our ports but not a company from the Middle East when we've already determined security is not an issue," Bush said.
Bush made his comments to reporters Tuesday aboard Air Force One, which he rarely does. His forceful statement came just hours after Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist urged the administration to block the deal until Congress could scrutinize it.
Frist, a Republican from Tennessee, called on the review committee that approved the deal to open its deliberations to congressional scrutiny.
"If the administration cannot delay the process, I plan on introducing legislation to ensure that the deal is placed on hold until this decision gets a more thorough review," Frist said in a written statement Tuesday.
House Speaker Dennis Hastert, an Illinois Republican, and Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, a California Democrat, also joined that call as lawmakers from both parties expressed concern over the deal.
"No one can understand it, Democrat or Republican," said Sen. Charles Schumer, a New York Democrat and a leading critic of the agreement. "Average citizens, everywhere we go, are stopping us and saying, 'What is going on?' "
Critics say the takeover raises security concerns, noting that two of the hijackers in the September 11, 2001, attacks on New York and Washington came from the UAE, and that the hijackers drew funds from bank accounts in Dubai, the financial center of the Persian Gulf.
But the Bush administration argues the deal was properly approved and poses no security threat, and that the UAE is an ally in the war on terror. (Watch what role the UAE plays in the war on terror -- 1:57)
"Nothing in this acquisition has anything to do with the responsibility for security in American ports," State Department spokesman Adam Ereli said. "That remains very firmly in the hands of the Department of Homeland Security. What we're talking about is the management of some port operations."
The agreement is scheduled to take effect March 2. It was approved by the federal Committee on Foreign Investments in the United States, which includes representatives of the Treasury, Commerce and Homeland Security departments, the FBI and the Pentagon.
Frist, a potential presidential contender in 2008, said the committee's approval process "needs to be more transparent and include a role for Congress."
"These deals could have a major impact on America's security, the protection of which is our greatest responsibility," he said in a written statement.
Bipartisan concern
Lawmakers swarmed over the issue Tuesday, criticizing the administration's approval of the contract and calling for a more extensive review.
Pelosi called for hearings into the deal "and others pertained to foreign ownership."
"In the meantime, Congress must put an immediate halt to this deal that the administration hastily approved in secret without input from the Congress or state officials and without a thorough review of how it might affect America's security," she said.
Rep. Peter King, the chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, and Schumer already have introduced a bill to put the deal on hold.
King, a New York Republican, said the UAE "has had unusual ties to al Qaeda in the past," and he called the administration's review of the decision "totally unacceptable after 9/11."
"My office today has received more phone calls on this than any issue in the 14 years I've been in the United States Congress, and every one of them is in support of what Senator Schumer and I are doing," he said.
Ereli said Homeland Security officials have had good relations with Dubai Ports World, and he said the United States has a "strong and effective partnership" with the UAE "from a counterterrorism point of view."
Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, a Florida Republican, said Congress has until March 2 "to ask a lot of questions, demand some answers and shed some light about these transactions."
And Sen. Susan Collins, a Maine Republican and the chairwoman of the Senate Government Affairs and Homeland Security Committee, said the agreement received "far less scrutiny than it should have."
"Although the UAE is an ally in the war on terrorism, the country has historically been used as a base of terrorist operations and financing," she said.
Two Republican governors -- George Pataki of New York and Robert Ehrlich of Maryland --- have indicated they may try to cancel port lease arrangements, according to The Associated Press.
A Dubai Ports World spokesman said Monday that the firm has received all the necessary regulatory approvals and that the security systems in place at the ports would only get better under the new management.
"We intend to maintain or enhance current security arrangements, and this is business as usual for the P&O terminals," the spokesman said.
A port security expert said fears that the agreement would reduce U.S. security are based on "bigotry" against Arabs and that "shameless" politicians are creating an issue they think will resonate with the public.
"This whole notion that Dubai is going to control or set standards for U.S. ports is a canard ... is factually false," said Kim Petersen, head of SeaSecure, a U.S.-based maritime security company, and executive director of the Maritime Security Council, which represents 70 percent of the world's ocean shipping.