Saturday, February 25, 2006

U.A.E. Operating in the U.S. Poses a Threat, Many Claim


I have been following the American media all week long, watching endless debates and discussions on right and left channels and programs on the U.A.E company or the Dubai company deal to run some major US ports. The UAE company, DP World, will operate and manage 11 specific, individual shipping terminals located within six ports.

Fierce campaigns were launched against the company from liberals, democrats, republicans and far left and right. They were saying in one breath “no to the U.A.E. company”. Suddenly, American democrats joined the “war on terror”. Do they really now support the war on terror or is the port issue is a good chance to show that they care about the U.S. security in the eyes of the American people, knowing how important the war on terror is to the US. I found that the majority of politicians were rejecting it because it is a Middle Eastern country. And the Middle East is known to be the hub of terrorists because few criminals were born or lived there. But actually, terrorists can be found anywhere in the world and under various nationality. Many anchors on TV, just said it out loud, we prefer a British company to run the American ports because that’s what they prefer without giving reasons, except that they do not feel comfortable with an Arab country.

All I can say that I fully agree with every word that President Bush has said in this regard. He is the one who launched the war on terror. I believe he understands the magnitude and dimensions of an U.A.E. company operating in the US. It was an open deal and no fishy agreements are included. The U.A.E. is hosting U.S. Army bases, why do Americans do not mind having their army on the U.A.E. soil? The U.A.E people are not minding the American troops on their soil. I believe that that the security of those ports is as invaluable as the US soldiers. The U.A.E. is not only a hub for some US troops but also so many U.S. businesses and companies.

This U.A.E. company will be operating in the U.S. under the US law and regulations. And it is a multi-billion company with so many shareholders and big businesses like these companies will never risk losing their businesses over security threats.

If there are serious security issues, these must be addressed objectively and seriously without bias, prejudice or without using the occasion for political gains.

Many streams in the U.S. tried to use the occasion to stretch their muscles as the heroes of the US security when the real heroes are the men in uniform fighting in the battlefield.
Sadly, the war on terror has created a kind of Arab phobia. It is so sad to see it that clear in the American media these days. The US administration at the end of the day did not hold a deal with Taliban. U.A.E. is a strong ally of the US. Messing with this deal will send a very wrong message to the US allies in the Middle East. Terrorists and extremists will be more than happy to see the US losing the trust and confidence of its allies.

4 Comments:

At 10:47 PM, Blogger Gateway Pundit said...

Thanks for weighing in on this important issue. I value and trust your analysis.

 
At 11:41 PM, Anonymous J.Doe said...

The security for the concerned US ports was, is and will be run by the US Coast Guard, so I don't believe giving the UAE ultimate control of the ports will lessen security. The Department of Homeland Security just came out with a bunch of new rules and regulations that must be followed ( for antiterrorism purposes) so if anyting security will be higher. I support this deal.

 
At 11:52 AM, Blogger DavidNic said...

It is all a political battle for an election year, but the knee jerk reaction from our elected officals disturbs me. That is something more than an election year issue.

The Coast Guard still runs security, and it is a dangerous road for the Congress to say that all arabs are terrorists. If they block this, even though the appropriate people have said it is safe, that is exactly what they will be saying.

 
At 5:14 AM, Anonymous D. Gray said...

The political ineptness of the Bush administration caused the DP World deal to escalate into a political firestorm. A secret committee, part of the Bush administration, approved the deal without alerting the President or any high ranking government officials. Congress first heard of the deal from the press which incorrectly stated that DP World would handle security at the ports.

President Bush said he stood firm on the deal and would vetoe legislation to block it. He acted like Clint "make my day" Eastwood. Several key congressman felt like he challenged them to a showdown. It's also an election year in the U.S. Every politician wanted jump on the "I support homeland security" bandwagon.

Two days later Bush said he and his cabinet only learned of the deal a few days ago. He didn't exactly inspire confidence in politicians or the American public.

As you correctly stated, Sept 11 and the war on terror have lead to a middle-eastern phobia by Americans. The violent protests over the cartoons did nothing to assuage their fears.

The whole issue could have been avoided if Bush's underlings would have told him about the deal in advance. He could then have briefed the leaders of Congress confidentially and correctly positioned the issue with both the press and the public. He could say he was calling for an additional 45-day investigation, as provided by law, to be absolutely certain there would be no security breach.

I predict Congress will be satisfied with the results of the 45-day investigation. A bigger hurdle may be the lawsuits launched by some of the state and city governments. I support the deal.

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home