US Senators Fail US Ally, UAE
Friday, March 10, 2006 at 03:41PM Dubai Ports World said Thursday it would give up its management stake in the controversial ports deal. Dubai Ports World announced just hours after Republican leaders warned President Bush that the House and Senate appeared ready to block Dubai from taking over some terminal operations at six U.S. ports.
"Because of the strong relationship between the United Arab Emirates and the United States and to preserve that relationship, DP World has decided to transfer fully the U.S. operation of P&O Operations North America to a United States entity," DP World’s chief operating officer, Edward H. Bilkey, said in a statement.
The company said its decision was "based on an understanding that DP World will have time to affect the transfer in an orderly fashion and that DP World will not suffer economic loss."
The announcement was somewhat of a blow for Democrats, who were pushing for a Senate vote on an amendment that would halt the deal. The Senate later voted 51-47 to ignore GOP requests to wait until a 45-day review of the deal is completed before they try to stop it. Republican leaders needed 67 votes to stop debate on the measure.
"This should make the whole issue go away," said Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist. "Dammit", said Democratic Senators.
Democrats were pushing for an amendment to ensure that no UAE-related company has any control over U.S. port operations. The amendment, sponsored by Dem. Sen. Chuck Schumer, would not only have blocked the Dubai deal, but also other U.S. ports deal with any company wholly owned or controlled by any foreign government that recognized the Taliban in Afghanistan from 1996-2001.
However, the UAE cut all ties of support with the Taliban after Sept. 11, 2001. The message was clear: the UAE condemned the terrorist attack on the US and would work to support the war on terror.
If the Democrats succeeded in forcing a vote on the amendment, Democrats could then claim a big election year win in the area of national security — an area Republicans generally have a stronger track record on.
"The bottom line is, security has to come first. We know that this deal would not bring security," Schumer, D-N.Y., told reporters Thursday. "We had to force this vote, it’s unfortunate that we did but now the handwriting is on the wall and that is that the UAE will not operate ports in the United States of America, plain and simple." (Right… this is why Schumer opposes the President’s surveillance program and the Patriot Act, because security has to come first.)
AND…Members of Dubai’s royal family were said to be furious on Thursday over U.S. plans to reject their bid to operate terminals at U.S. ports - and they’re threatening to cancel American business deals and perhaps even boot U.S. military forces from strategic bases in the UAE.
"They’re saying, ‘All we’ve done for you guys, all our purchases, we’ll stop it, we’ll just yank it,’" a deal insider told the Hill newspaper.
The source said that Dubai’s royals were "furious" at both Republicans and Democrats over the rebuff.
At stake are two major U.S. bases in the UAE. The port of Jebel Ali docked over 500 Navy warships last year, and played host over 70,000 American troops.
The Air Force flies reconnaissance and refueling missions out of the Al Dahfra airbase, which played a critical role in the air wars over Iraq and Afghanistan.
A harsh reaction from Dubai could impact a pending decision for the Emirates Group airline to purchase Boeing’s new 787 Dreamliner - or go with the European competition, the Airbus A350.
Last fall, the Hill said, Dubai ordered 42 Boeing 777’s in a deal worth $9.7 billion.
The United States and United Arab Emirates have postponed free trade talks, the U.S. Trade Representative’s office said on Friday, a day after a Dubai state-owned company said it would sell U.S. port management operations to calm a political furore.
Bill Reinsch, president of the National Foreign Trade Council, said the ports episode would make it harder for Bush to accomplish his goals in the Middle East.
"The message is that we’re not distinguishing between countries that help us in the war on terrorism and countries that don’t. So the obvious question is why cooperate with the United States, if we’re going to treat you as a terrorist anyway?" Reinsch said.
Cathy Novelli, former chief U.S. negotiator for the UAE talks, said she thought the two countries would get past the episode.
"This is one very unfortunate incident and that should not be the determining factor in a very robust overall economic relationship," Novelli said. But "I think it’s very understandable that this would upsetting to them."
Got that right. Homeland Security said of the port deal prior to Thursday:
“DP World will not, nor will any other terminal operator, control, operate or manage any United States port. DP World will only operate and manage specific, individual terminals located within six ports.”
(read the full security measures and who actually secures US ports)
Will Dem. Sen. Chuck Schumer author an amendment banning these countries from currently operating in US ports?: China, Hong Kong, Japan, South Korea, Singapore and Taiwan.
Way to go Senators.
Michelle Malkin Expose the Left Sister Toldjah Aloha Daze Generation Why? Iowa Voice Flopping Aces Stop the ACLU
Trackback URL:
http://amyproctor.squarespace.com/blog/trackback/408279
View Printer Friendly Version
Email Article to Friend
Reader Comments (11)
I cannot think of a more grave tactical blunder in this war; the President is completely right on this issue. Look at the numbers: 56 US Navy warships docked in UAE ports; 70,000 troops circulated through intermediate staging bases there; 500 US Navy ships docked over the past year; we using their airfields for attacks in Iraq and Aghanistan; $100 million in Katrina relief (more than every other nation combined) and yet we deem them a terror threat???? How STUPID!!!!
Why should a proud and law-abiding Arab nation support us when our politicians spit in their faces this way? How could they have possibly demonstrated more loyalty to thier partnership with us? And now our own Congress treats them as common terrorists. This will have disatrous effects in the GWOT and I fully understand (and support) President Bush on his strong leadership (including the threat of veto) on this issue.
This is a sad and disgusting turn of events that makes the US look not only arrogant but unapologetically racist against Arabs. History will show that Schumer and his supporters plunged a gratuitous dagger in the heart of our efforts to fight terror with this naked political power grab. He either does not care about security at all or he is stupid beyond all comprehension. This is the worst possible thing that could have happened; Arabs are proud people and to spit in their faces this way after they have demonstrated such loyalty and friendship and allied support against terror is simple unconscionable.
I am completely ashamed of the Congress.
To paraphrase the words of Winston Churchill: We have suffered an unmitigated defeat.
This whole thing is a shame for many reasons. I feel very sad for the UAE. There ARE good Arab countries, whose cultures are different than ours but who are good allies. The UAE, Kuwait, Quatar, even Turkey. And how much stock does Saudi Arabia have in the United States? Billions! But is Saudi Arabia more trustworthy than the UAE?
The cowardly Republicans have lost my respect. The dim-witted Democrats never had it. Americans as a public have shown once again that they are too lazy to do the research and the brainwork to get to the bottom of such important issues. This is why 9/11 happened; America was asleep at the wheel.
Ya know what sends a better message? Naked arab pyramids.
All you can do is point to 3 or 4 at most American RESERVE (not active duty soldiers)soldiers to discredit everything good and patriotic. Don't talk about the hundreds of headless victims of these terrorists have made... poor terrorists... poor naked pyramids. We know that stripping a mass murderer is FAR worse than his crime. (you forgot to say "Halliburton", "Gitmo" and "Rove"). Oh, and NO MORE BLOOD FOR OIL!
But I'm assuming this means you support the deal with the UAE since you support terrorists' rights, yes?
http://www.hrc.org/Template.cfm?Section=Press_Room&CONTENTID=31368&TEMPLATE=/ContentManagement/ContentDisplay.cfm
And more ties with Al Qeada and Bin Laden than Iraq EVER had before 9/11.
http://news.lp.findlaw.com/ap/p/56/02-23-2006/a6f200127dd722fe.html
And let's get something else straight. The Democrats cannot approve or defeat anything by themselves, because they are in the MINORITY in the House and the Senate. It was REPUBLICANS like Peter King, Duncan Hunter, Lindsey Graham and Bill Frist that spiked this deal. And the truth is...they were doing their jobs, which is representing the will of the people. The job of Congress is NOT to rubber-stamp anything the President proposes. It's to act as a co-equal branch of government. Poll after Poll indicated that the vast majority of the American people did NOT want this deal.
Why are you suggesting that Congress go against the will of the American people?
--Cobra
I also thought liberals were against the US "forcing democracy" on poor little old Iraq. Are you suggesting we should do it to the UAE?
We also have other valuable Arab allies that are absolutely VITAL to peace in the Middle East; Kuwait, Qatar.... both have similiar (if not identical) governments as the UAE.
The "9/11" issue has been asked and answered. UAE CUT ALL TIES TO THE TALIBAN/AL-QAEDA AFTER 9/11 AND BECAME A PARTNER WITH THE US ON THE WAR ON TERROR. What is so hard to understand about that concept? Or is it that some people just don't want that to be true?
Thanks for "setting me straight." Whew, I needed that! It might interest you do know that those Republicans who are " doing their jobs" (funny how you ONLY classify it that way when they align with Democrats! and when's the last time Democrats aligned with Republicans? They're not honest enough to; it's all about POLITICS for them)... those Republicans are just as bad as the Democrats, posturing in an election year. That's all this is about.
Cobra, this isn't a straight up Democracy: it's a democratic repubulic. The voters have already elected Congress and Senators; it's irrelevent in the decision making process what American's opinon polls say about the Pres. Abrham Lincoln, Dwight D. Eisenhower, William McKinley, Franklin D. Roosevelt, Dwight D. Eisenhower.... all low in the "public opinion polls". Something about wartime presidents.....
Americans are basically uninformed and stupid. YES Congress should have done the right thing and not take direction from an uninformed, ingnorant public. This complex issue cannot be led by public opinion. Congressmen and Senators are not puppets and the public should not be pulling the strings: politicians are supposed to be the informed ones making the best decisions. Clearly they screwed up this time.
And since we're being so intellectually honest here, you MUST then support the Republican move across the country in S. Dakota, Mississippi, TN, etc, to outlaw abortion, right? Republicans are just doing their jobs.
:)
Two dangerous countries: Deutchland, CCCP. When were they dangerous? Think a little bit here ... do we give them a pass today?
Emerging dangerous countries: aww man, a handful, won't even make sense listing them.
Returning dangerous countries: China, Korea, Iran.
One company (only one, just for effect) that stands out in my mind as a recent sell-out: Loral
Research, not too much passion, and a little wisdom goes a long way. If we are to learn from the past to make better decisions now and in the future, how should this deal have happened? And, to use this same judgement to get the current result with the UAE, we should stop all trade with Germany, Japan, Russia, lots of South America and Africa ... a whole laundry list!
Ooooh, and I almost forgot, Osterreich und Schweiz!!! Does anyone know their stellar past deeds that makes your skin crawl? Think ... google ... anything?!
Look at the world map folks. For our aircraft and ships to get into theater, and then the boots and vehicles, we need some very important allies. And, we've done some important "programs" with many countries that provide us entry points (ports and airfields as well as airspace).
Oh my, when Boeing loses this deal, guess where the money goes? The EU.
Nicely done. The UN gets a cut all over again. Let's just give more money to the French. What a waste.
Ooops, my internal monologue is broken again. Gotta have that looked at soon.
>>>"Americans are basically uninformed and stupid. YES Congress should have done the right thing and not take direction from an uninformed, ingnorant public. This complex issue cannot be led by public opinion. Congressmen and Senators are not puppets and the public should not be pulling the strings: politicians are supposed to be the informed ones making the best decisions. Clearly they screwed up this time."
Maybe the differences in our viewpoints is on what we feel "government" is. I believe that in America, "government" is "of the people, for the people and by the people." I don't know if that's the jist of the paragraph you wrote above.
I actually agree with you to some extent here. I think there are far too many Americans who don't read enough about history, geo-politics, constitutional rights, or the nuanced complexities of the middle east.
But YOU have to admit that George W. Bush didn't win the Presidency based upon intellectualism at all. As a matter of fact, Bush was and is the anti-intellectual, with his greatest political strength coming from over-simplification of highly complex issues, and talking point repetition.
In essence, Bush is the "Faith-based" President, who does best in stark, black and white issues, but stumbles when he has to actually EXPLAIN something complicated, beyond the headlines and catch phrases. Now, as you said, that's alright as long as the American people don't research the topic, or see the results with their own eyes.
Amy writes:
>>>"And since we're being so intellectually honest here, you MUST then support the Republican move across the country in S. Dakota, Mississippi, TN, etc, to outlaw abortion, right? Republicans are just doing their jobs."
To be absolutely intellectually honest, Amy, South Dakota is the GREATEST campaign advertisement that the Democrats could have ever asked for. The only thing that would work even better, would be for this case to reach the SCOTUS and Roe gets overturned. Then you can say goodnight to GOP control for decades.
--Cobra