Dubai Ports World: Commercial Racial Profiling

Here are the reasons why I support the sale of the port management duties of P&O to DP World:

1) It would be a step backward for U.S. security to stop this deal from taking place. It assumes that DP World will not carry out its obligations and basically treats Dubai as an enemy nation in spite of the help that it has been to us since the attacks on 9/11/2001. If we thumb a modern Arab city such as Dubai in the eye, then why should any Arab nation, or any nation for that matter, help the U.S. in the war with al Qaeda if this is how it will be treated.

2) Pakistan has been home to a lot worse than Dubai yet we consider Pakistan to be a key ally in the war with al Qaeda. If we are going to reject Dubai then we should immediately cut all ties with Pakistan. Yes, some money laundering took place in Dubai. That is not exactly an action unique to an Arab country.

3) Dubai intelligence officials were a big help in unraveling A.Q. Khan's Pakistani nuclear black market activities.

4) Dubai is a wonderful example of capitalism in the global marketplace. DP World is a world class company, not some back room, fly by night operation.

5) Who was the first Middle East country to go along with the U.S. Container Security Initiative? Dubai.

6) Who agreed to prevent the passage of nuclear materials through its ports? Dubai.

7) Who has invested in modern technology such as installing radiation detection equipment? Dubai.

8) Who has directed its banks to improve their internal controls to stop terrorist financing? Dubai.

9) Companies in Dubai are run transparently with modern accounting. Dubai is a great example for other Muslim Arab nations to follow in being open to new ideas and being involved in the global marketplace.

10) With Dubai's commitment to new security technology, the U.S. can partner with DP World to develop better ways to scan containers and to track them.

11) The U.S. is a worldwide champion for capitalism and transparency and anticorruption in business practices. We should not become protectionist when an Arab country legitimately engages in the capitalist system and plays by the rules.

12) The U.S. is best when we are creative in opening doors to the rest of the world, not when we give in to fear and paranoia.

13) We should not alienate a modern nation, the very people in the Middle East that we need to encourage to expand their influence in other Arab nations to bring their fellow Muslims into the global marketplace for their good and ours.

14) The U.S. needs to stop this slide that I am seeing into neo-isolationism. This is the 21st century, not the 1930s. I know that we average Americans tend to tire rather easily when it comes to engaging in international relations over an extended period of time as we have since 9/11/2001, but it would be to our own detriment and peril to begin to think that we can ignore the rest of the world and wall ourselves off - economically or otherwise.

 

Yes, Galatian, I am afraid we are seeing the result of a lack of independent thinking by many of our fellow citizens on this DP World issue.

 

No, we are awarding nothing. P&O had the contracts to operate some terminals at some ports in the United States. P&O has sold - legally and transparently - its port terminal operations to DP World.

It's called capitalism.

If many of the American people are going to turn their backs on capitalism then I guess they can go back to digging taters and living a subsistence lifestyle.

 

CFIUS approved the deal. The president is not a member of CFIUS.

 

Good, since I didn't watch O'Reilly talking about this on his TV show. I'm not even sure what his stance is on it as lately I have watched very little of his TV show and listened very little to his radio show.

 

Dubai has been an ally in the war with al Qaeda. If we treat an Arab ally this way, then what incentive is there for other Arab nations, or any nation, to be our ally against al Qaeda? If their businesses are going to play by the rules and we tell them, "You're Arab(or You're non-American) and that's not good enough" then there is no incentive for other nations to ally themselves with us.

 

It shows that Dubai is assisting us in attempting to stop the flow of nuclear materials. Since DP World has every reason to operate its business in our ports with due diligence, there every reason to expect it to cooperate with such efforts in our ports.

 

I fully expect DP World to do so.

 

DP World has every reason to maintain its world class reputation. These U.S. terminals are not its, or Dubai's, only business interests in the world. If a company proves to do shoddy work then its future is quite bleak indeed.

 

Why should concerns over Secret Service protection be an issue in regards to a business deal? Remember, the Coast Guard, Homeland Security, and Customs will still be in charge of security as they have been while P&O has managed these terminals.

 

There is no bad news in that.

 

Chertoff said he didn't know about it. Homeland Security has a member on CFIUS but I don't know if it's the secretary. Perhaps an undersecretary or assistant actually does the work on CFIUS on behalf of Homeland Security. If the secretary is the one who is actually supposed to be on CFIUS then I would be disappointed in Chertoff's performance.

Wouldn't have anything to do with my points about the reasons why the deal with DP World should stand. Nor would that change the fact of who is in charge of port security - Customs, the Coast Guard, and Homeland Security.

If we block DP World and P&O is getting out of the port terminal management business I guess there would be no company to manage those particular terminals and they would have to be shut down. Or the state governments could take them over and run them; that would be sort of like having FEMA running them, I reckon.

 

That's the management of some terminals in some ports, not anywhere near the whole shebang.