The Other Shoe Drops: The Insanity of the UAE Ports Deal

[Catchawave]

This article was near the top of a Google news search! I believe the author is a DUer :toast:


OpEdNews.com

Original Article at http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_katherin_060223_the_other_shoe_drops.htm


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
February 23, 2006

The Other Shoe Drops: The Insanity of the UAE Ports Deal

By Katherine Brengle

Every week, there is a new mess unleashed from the White House for us citizens to worry about. This week, we found out that the US government is selling control of six of our major seaports to a state-run company from the United Arab Emirates. After everything this administration has put the American people and the world through in the past 5 years, the "other shoe" has finally dropped.

Surprisingly, in this era of fractious partisan politics, there is massive opposition to this deal coming from both sides of the political playing field inside the United States. All conscientious Americans are able to see through this move and understand what a ridiculous affront to national security allowing another country to run our ports is. There are many reasons to oppose this deal. Two of the 9/11 hijackers are allegedly linked to the UAE, terrorists have been bankrolled by the UAE government as well as established banking centers within the country. The UAE royal family has alleged ties to both al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden himself. The company to which our government plans to sell control of these ports is not just an independent foreign company (which I personally believe would be bad enough), but a state-owned foreign company. This difference is also extremely important.

There is another problem that has received less attention thus far. In addition to its sponsorship of terrorism, the UAE allows a variety of human rights violations to thrive inside its borders: human rights violations have been noted by Human Rights Watch, the United Nations, and the US State Department. These include the illegal retention of the passports of expatriate employees (to prevent them from leaving jobs before their employment contracts end), blue collar labor abuse, widespread worker discrimination based on race, sex, age and nationality, use of child slaves as jockeys in camel racing, and a thriving illegal sex industry (including but not limited to children).

It is reasonable to question our government's wish to engage in dealings with the UAE, especially considering the Bush administration's claims that we invaded Iraq (and to some extent, Afghanistan) in order to liberate its people from a leader guilty of a number of human rights violations. We are at war with the nation of Iraq while our government continues to deal financially with other human rights violators such as the United Arab Emirates. We occupy Iraq while we continue friendly relations with Saudi Arabia, the country of origin of the vast majority of the 9/11 hijackers and Osama bin Laden himself. Our government is setting the stage for war with Iran while we ignore the real problems of the world.

The United Arab Emirates is a recently developed country. Oil was first exported from the UAE just over 40 years ago, and since then the country has transformed from an impoverished nation to a modern, industrialized nation. The UAE's wealth comes largely from oil and gas exports--roughly 33% of the country's GDP. It is the third largest oil exporter in the region, behind Saudi Arabia and Iran. Could the US government possible have ulterior motives for getting involved with the UAE?
<snip>

[cap]

1. state owned company means owned by royal family

in the UAE, the L'etat, c'est moi. (The state is me).

This is the same stuff the Bush family pulled with the Nazis... sleeping with the enemy. Let's see the argument: Prescott Bush could have business dealing with the Germans... Not All Germans are Bad...the company they were investing in was a big conglomerate that happened to be interested in a steel works facility in Auschwitz Poland... nothing wrong there...Big comany... hard to know what's really going on there... etc., etc. while making record profits.

Cheney did the same thing with oil in Iraq and Iran. Embargo with country leads to less competition for resources. Skirt the law, forget about morality and buy low and sell high.

Bush strategy: Political Arbitrage. When Political/legal circumstances force a difference in pricing due to actual/perceived embargo/tariff, buy low and sell high. Political arbitrage leads to price advantages due to fewer entrants into a given market (aka competition is playing by the rules). Have sufficient political clout so that you dont get prosecuted. Erase all evidence when investigators get close.

[Dunvegan]

2. I think strategy should also ALWAYS link UAE does not recognize Israel

Since there are multiple issues here, multiple opposed sides to the deal, this fact should go into the short list everytime so as to "cover the waterfront" (so to speak.)

The above list is also very tight. Thanks Catchawave and Katherine.

I actually think that the issue shouldn't be the UAE port administration of US ports, but US administration of ports post-911.

DHS should have pulled back port authority and management from all foreign companies, invested the Iraq police action money in domestic contracts, training, and infrastructure, and then used a combination of domestic port companies working hand-in-hand with the best security people we could muster in Homeland Security for a rational response to post-911 border controls against inflitration and permeability.