1. Dubai Ports World  is majority owned and controlled by a foreign government – the United Arab Emirates (UAE).  It would take over the operation of 6 major ports in the Untied States from a public company that is based in Britain, but not owned by the government of Great Britain.  So we are substituting a foreign country for a foreign company.  I don’t believe that our ports should be run by an agent of a foreign country.

2. The interagency committee in the Treasury Department which reviews proposed foreign investment in the United States should have subjected the transaction to the 45-day investigation provided for under the law for cases involving a government-owned company such as DPW.  It did not. 

3. Despite the obvious high-stakes homeland security implications of this transaction, the decision was made without President Bush, Treasury Secretary Snow, or Defense Secretary Rumsfeld knowing about it.

4. It makes a difference that the assets being purchased are ports, not pork bellies.  Post 9/11, the United States has been forced to take very seriously the capacity of al Qaeda to infiltrate our borders.  One scenario we must anticipate confronting is the import of nuclear materials – either a bomb or radioactive materials for a “dirty bomb” – through our ports.  These are pieces of critical infrastructure that we should not allow a foreign government to control, and our ports are among them.

5. The Coast Guard and Customs are “in charge of security” at our ports, but almost none of the cargo that enters our ports is ever inspected.  The port operator files a security plan with the Coast Guard, but implementation of that plan is in the hands of the port operator, not the Coast Guard.  The United Arab Emirates, not the Coast Guard, would be loading and unloading the cargo, hiring and firing security personnel, doing background checks, providing for security training for all facility personnel, deciding who gets access to the facility, and providing for the physical security of the area. So while it may be technically accurate to say that the Coast Guard is “in charge of” security, our safety is principally in the hands of the port operator.

6. Finally, it seems odd that the committee that reviewed this (but didn’t do the required investigation) did not respond to the following red flags:
a. Two of the 9/11 hijackers were citizens of the UAE;
b. The UAE port of Dubai was the hub of the black market in nuclear materials run by A.Q. Khan, a Pakistani who spread nuclear weapons capabilities to Libya, North Korea and Iran, and
c. The UAE was one of only three countries to formally recognize the Taliban government in Afghanistan.

7. Three years ago the Coast Guard determined that to ensure homeland security, ports need an appropriation of about $5.4 billion for the next 10 years, but the Administration and the Republicans in Congress have approved only a $715 million total since 2001. To do the job expected of them, the Coast Guard needs to receive full funding for security.
 
For all these reasons, I am not comforted by the President’s assurances, and will be supporting legislation that will prevent foreign government-controlled entities from purchasing critical homeland security facilities.  That would be fair to all such companies – Arab and non-Arab alike.

- ED MARKEY

Read Bloggers' Responses