Sat. February 24, 2018 Get Published  Get Alerts
Roundtable Forum - DUBAI PORTS WORLD

Dubai Ports World, a Dubai-owned, American run port logistics firm, was recently forced to surrender newly acquired operations in the U.S. President Bush thought it a matter of free and global trade; opponents to the idea saw national security endangered. Is that opposition correct, was it mere political posturing, a mixture of xenophobia (Arabophobia) and protectionism or some combination thereof? (3/19/2005)

Comments (0) | Add Comment
Twitter Like

Dr. John Tierney, Institute of World Politics

Response: Although the deal is now history the implications of the rejection will be around for some time. Both the bizarre handling of the case by the administration and the precipitous rejection by Congress have made the US look foolish and crazy throughout the world. Since the war on terror is largely a political and intelligence contest, I should think that the US would seek allies from the Arab world... more

Joshua Muravchik, American Enterprise Institute

Response: I really don’t have any to add to the column by Charles Krauthammer – he said ‘look, there is one danger the administration is not acknowledging and that is the fact that security information must be shared with the port management company and if one presumes that the ownership is a Dubai company it’s might be more likely that the company could be infiltrated by terrorists or agents.’ That being ... more

George Pieler, Institute for Policy Innovation

Response: The collapse of the Dubai Ports deal is a bad thing for everyone. Proponents of the deal, seeing a rational economic decision in an interdependent global economy, know that its failure undermines the Western consensus in favor of economic integration and free markets. Critics who think the deal’s approval process lacked adequate security safeguards now worry about every US contract with foreign en... more

About | Contact Us | Support Us | Terms and Conditions

All Rights Reserved. Copyright 2002 - 2018