The Dubai Threat

Every now and then a great democracy like America throws up something so objectionable, so unpleasant, so nasty that it makes even a passionate democrat like me wonder whether the whole thing is really worth the effort.

.

We have a classic of the genre now with the Dubai ports battle.

The bipartisan opposition in the US to the takeover of P&O, the British company that runs six US ports, by Dubai Ports World is nothing but opportunistic populism that enables, exploits and empowers the very worst instincts of some Americans.  It has no basis in economics or in concerns about national security. It is chauvinism and pandering of the most contemptible sort.

Take the article in today's USA Today by the two most loathsome (it's an equal opportunity thing - one's a Democrat, one's a Republican) protagonists, Seantor Charles Schumer and Congressman Peter King.

(While we're on the subject of security, may I point that Mr King was for years one of the most active American sympathisers with the IRA, so I guess he knows a thing or two both about nasty ethnic loathing and the threat of terrorism to decent, innocent peoples).

Their objection to the takeover is apparently that it would hand over control of US ports to "a country through which a number of the 9/11 hijackers travelled and al-Qaeda money was funneled."

Oh, and this makes Dubai a unique threat, does it? As I recall, al Qaeda people also travelled or funnelled their money through Germany, Britain, Italy, the Czech Republic, not to mention the US. The men behind the 7/7 bombings in London were British, as was Richard Reid, the shoe bomber.  Why not ban them all from bidding for US companies?

They they: "How can we be certain the company itself will not smuggle illicit weapons and materials into our nation?"  Well, we can't be certain, I suppose.  But this is either another meaningless objection that could be applied to any company or country, or it comes dangerously close to insinuating that DPW is a terrorist-sponsoring organisation

Finally they say,  gravely, "How do we ensure that one of its employees is not working for our enemies?  Yes.  How do we ensure that?  How have we ensured that employees of the CIA or the FBI have not been working for our enemies?

And that's it, apparently.  For these reasons the rules of international trade and capital, the findings of the US's own body specifically established to investigate foreign takeovers of US companies, should be discarded?

The grisly truth is that, these despicable cynics know that a large number of Americans have a simple, knee-jerk fear or loathing these days of Arabs, and though they well know that the issue with port security is not who owns them, but how they are policed, they are quite happy, indeed eager, to indulge this xenophobia for the sake of cheap political advantage.

All of them, Messrs Schumer and King, Hillary Clinton, Bill Frist and all the others, have, with exquisite timing, stuck a new sign above the door for foreign investors who want to help plug America's $700bn current account deficit.

Arabs -  or perhaps Moslems - need not apply.

Comments

[NewSisyphus]

Of course, one of the great pleasures of having idiots like King in Congress is that his presence very often saves the rest of us the time and trouble it would take to thoroughly research questions of public policy. It is usually enough to simply inquire as to what King thinks and then passionately hold the opposite view.

Given the President's very public, very brave and very forthright defense of the Dubai deal, I'm wondering how the Guardian crowd will use this as Further Evidence (Though None Is Needed) that the President is a Holy Roller Christian Warrior. I'm sure they'll think of something ingenious by tomorrow, something that will also implicate that other great British bug-a-boo, The Jewish Lobby.

Rather looking forward to it, now that I think about it.

[jls]

"foreign investors who want to help plug America's $700bn current account deficit"!?!?!?

OK, so, to "fix" the deficit we sell off everything we own while at the same time we outsource all of our ability to produce to foreign countries since, in their greed, American corporations are unwilling to pay respectable wages to their workers while their executives laugh all the way to the bank, and we leave an open door to illegals so they can "do the work americans 'refuse' to do". And when all of this is said and done we are left with exactly what???

[TERRY WOLF]

Well perhaps, but other than attacking the people who are attacking those people, do you have anything of substance to say regarding this matter?

[Luke Costanzo]

What a bunch of hypocrits!!!!!
Wasn't it the US government that also backed the Taliban with CIA money to help drive the Russians from Afghanistan all those years ago? Carl Levin and Hilary Clinton failed to recognise this point in their recent comments about Dubai helping to fund the Taliban (the probable argument being - it wasn't us). Lets not forget that Dubai is one of the most Western friendly Arab nations and generalising that all Arab nations are a "bunch of terrorists", as is the inference, will only do more harm than good.
The US is always very happy to do business with people provided it is on their terms..................

[m\rtin walker]

Well said.

[Steve Robertson]

Perhaps you have forgotten about the "simple, knee-jerk" reaction from Arabs to the recent cartoons. Perhaps you have forgotten the violence (how many dead so far) and intimidation ("sorry, what was that about beheading?"). Perhaps you have forgotten the debt we owe to those who gave their lives for our freedoms and perhaps you have forgotten the responsibility we have preserving these freedoms for our children. Perhaps, unlike an ever increasing proportion of the population, you simply do not care.

[Arthur Demmons]

It seems to me that the dispute over United States ports and the public opposition to it in the United States should send a messages to the moslems world.

Clean up your act. Stop acting like idiots because of a mosque in Iraq or a cartoon in Denmark. Allow women to drive cars, vote and have equal rights.

The impression I have of Islam is that it is hostile to freedom of speech, in fact all human rights. To a certain extent all churches have trouble with free speech but islam seems to be the worst. It a religion that not changed in fourteen hundred years and needs to mature.

If Moslems want to be trusted, they need to start behaving like human beings if it is possible for them to do so.

[mearns nimmo]

Dear Mr Baker, I entirely agree with your comments, and would be very glad if you could possibly give your readers some idea as to why US politicians have sunk so low, and how (and indeed whether) they can be rescued?

Yours sincerely

Mearns Nimmo

[Ben Samson]

Excellent article. I am relieved to see a British journalist issue such strong condemnation of what is a fairly black and white matter (no pun intended). I was surprised to see Hillary Clinton amongst those to oppose the deal - such opportunistic play. At times the Americans seem so very focused on the short term, something we have seen demonstrated over and over again: Afghan war, Iraq.

[suzanne harrison]

Typical European Americaphobic headline button (not your fault)-- What does xenophobia have to do with it???

Brilliant on the President's part to support this as a bold bridge to Islam. But for you to pooh-pooh the public's commonsense leeriness about the increased possibility of an Al-Qaeda sympathizer slipping into the picture is unreasonable. I'm for the UAE company but it's hardly a slamdunk issue--or a "black and white"/rascist as other British publications have blared out.

[Phillip Boiarski]

There is no arguing that politicians from both left and right are whipping up xenophobia for political advantage. Where, oh where, might they have picked that terrible habit up? Could it be the Bush administration screaming 9/11 every time anyone dares opine even a slightly moderate thought? An old American folk saying is apt, "What goes around, comes around."

[keith perkinson]

Love reading your comments about us Yanks as it is good to get different opinions. I live in Chicago, and often get tired of hearing opinions from the East Coast - NY and DC. As an evil 'liberal' and Blue Stater, I enjoy this controversy on several levels. (1) It empasizes how out of touch and insulated the White House is regarding public opinion in this country. They were clueless on the port sale.
(2) Illustrates clearly that this administration doesn't give a hoot about Republicans, Democrats, or anyone. We can do anything we please, at home and around the globe. Their attitude is best represented by this classic line from the film Blazing Saddles -- "Badges? We don't need no stinking badges!" (3) Shows incompetence of the leader of the Free World. He had no idea this sale was in the offing! His Alfred E. Neumann "What me worry" mentality is funny and frightening. I see he now thinks the UK has changed names and is called "Great British". Can we clone Lincoln and Churchill ASAP.

[Deborah Knox]

I object to Mr. Baker's objection to some of our Congressperson's concern about the sale of US ports to DPW by describing it as "chauvinism and pandering of the most contemptible sort" ?!

The reaction of many Americans on both sides of the aisle, I believe, are partially the result of 4 years of the Bush Administration cramming the "be afraid, be very afraid" attitude by endlessly saying terror, terrorist, Iraq, again and again at every opportunity. Minimizing the visceral reaction, which many in the administration and conservative pundits are doing, does a disservice to a situation where there is genuine unease, warranted or not. Time will tell.

The secretive (and evidently clueless) Administration, that believes itself to be above all laws, was naive to think that nobody would care.

[T.J. Cassidy]

I don't imagine history making anyone look good from this - not in Congress, the White House, Dubai or even the pages of USA Today - or even The Times.

Still, Gerry, you should consider the real motives within Congress. With midterm elections coming up, the Dems finally see a weak spot in Bush's armor which even they can attack. OTOH, the GOP are finally worried enough about looking weak on national security (I was going to say 'foreign policy,' but is there a difference anymore?) that they break from Bush just enough to try to steal some of the Dems' thunder, lest they lose *free* on-screen face time.

The Dems will try to push through a bill to outlaw the sale. The GOP will stall it as long as they can to move the issue closer to November. Even if they don't, they will okay it only the first time around to avoid giving the Dems grist for their campaign mills. Then Bush will veto the bill. The Hill GOPs will then finally join up again with the White House to kill it in the override attempt.

Remember, you read it here first.

[Linda Delfs]

Mr Bush has been telling us we are at war for close on to 5 years and that Arabs are the enemy. So, that being the case, we would be trading with the enemy if the ports deal were to go through. It happens to be against the law to trade with the enemy - Cuba for example (yes, still the enemy after 50plus years). So why is the administration so surprised when Congress point that out? You, at least, had the excuse of ignorance.
What I am waiting for (quite on the other hand) is for the administration to recall that during WWII all personal income was taxed to 100%. If that were implemented now, we could almost balance the budget in perpetuity (since the war on terrorism will never end....).

[Thomas Murphy]

Perfect assessment! Political opportunism rides high. Many years ago Al D'Amato was castigated for referring to Schumer as a "putz". Al hit the nail on the head. Schumer is world class at sniffing out grandstanding, headline-hunting opportunities.

Once again I am puzzled by the media's failure to dig out the actual facts behind a news event. The other day I heard that there are 182 port facility operators in the Port of New York, only two of which are being taken over by the UAE company. Only one of these is in New Jersey, but Governor Corzine (another putz if you ask me) is sponsoring legislation to scrap the entire East Coast deal.

So let us pose some questions for the media to find answers for:

1. How many port facility operations are there world-wide?

2. How many different companies operate these facilities?

3. Are any of these facilities more secure than ours on the East Coast?

4. If so, which ones and who operates them?

5. Do any of these operators have capabilities comparable to those of P & O or DPW and would any such operators be more acceptable than DPW?

6. We know that DPW is based in Dubai, but who owns it? Is it possible the UAE has no actual control?

[Jessamine Welsh]

Don't we in America have an election coming up?? The Democrats are crazed to get back congressional control, and the Republicans -- with W's ratings in the crapper -- are running scared. This one is a real no-brainer.

[maxx pinsky]

Hi Thomas Murphy,

Per your query at point #6: DPW is a UAE state owned corporation.

[shahbaz mizra]

I work for an american bank, we just opened offices in dubai, with business booming. Half of my colleagues have been on holiday to dubai, all loved it! It is UK's #2 city sun break destination according to my travel agent. The UAE are trying to become a proper economy away from oil and is a strong ally of the West, as a muslim I find some comments very offensive especially by Arthur Demmons above - you obviosuly totally ignorant about a religion which accounts for 1.2 billion people on this planet, I think some americans really need to take a look at themselves and ask - are we "racist". I agree with the fact that there is an element which is fundementalist and needs to be stopped, but this has really been kicked off by the "War on Terror". You can't demonise everything Arab - have Americans learned nothing from McCarthyism or the Civil Rights movement?

[Joe Denmark]

The tempo of muslim brutality is increasing. Barely a month passes without news of more muslim hate-crimes. One hate-crime after another, the muslims are causing even formerly sympathetic Westerners to have doubts. The muslims in the West are a fifth column of traitors and should not be trusted but should be deported. They will continue to erode freedom of speech, freedom for women, freedom of religion, all freedom to be destroyed.

[Susan]

What worries me is the Bush adminstration's complete incompetence. I have very little trust in the pronouncement of any government agency at this point. I have serious doubts about the trustworthiness of any commission.

There seems to be a certain amount of hypocricy here. One of the reasons the Arab boycott of Israel is illegal is because companies that have Jews in improtant positions or on their board of directors are included in the boycott, but apparently no on in the UK finds that objectionable.

[laban]

it's a foolish decision. But it's not on a par with invading Russia or annexing Bohemia.

We must keep a sense of perspective here !