President Bush continues to insist that a deal that would hand over security at six major U.S. ports to a government-run company based in the United Arab Emirates (U.A.E.) is a good one and has threatened to veto any attempts by Congress to halt the deal. Bush has never vetoed any legislation during his five-plus years in the White House.
Members of both parties have spoken out forcefully against the arrangement, saying that handing security over to a country that was used by some of the September 11 terrorists as a financial and operational base would compromise security. Two of the hijackers who took part in the September 11 attacks were from the U.A.E. The U.A.E. was also one of only three countries in the world to recognize the Taliban-led government of Afghanistan.
Senator Bill Frist (R-Tenn), a longtime Bush supporter has also spoken out against the deal. 'I'm not against foreign ownership,' Frist said, 'but my main concern is national security.'
Representative Ed Markey (D-Mass) also voiced strong opposition to the proposal. 'Here in the United States, there's a program that only inspects two to four percent of cargo as it hits our ports,' Markey explained. 'Now, on top of that, the Bush administration is now going to allow a foreign government to play the role in the unloading of all of this cargo as it is now in the American ports. And we know that al-Qaeda wants to get nuclear materials onto a flatbed truck and explode a nuclear device in an American city.'
Some members of Congress have also indicated that they had enough votes to override any presidential veto on this matter.
Bush called the criticism a form of racism against Arabs, saying that a British firm had been running security in the ports and there were no objections whatsoever.
In fact, the company from the U.A.E., known as Dubai Ports World, has bought the British based company, Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Co.
Mr. Bush insisted that the deal with Dubai Ports World would not jeopardize American security.
'If there was any chance that this transaction would jeopardize the security of the United States, it would not go forward. I think it sends a terrible signal to friends around the world that it's okay for a company from one country to manage the port, but not (from) a country that plays by the rules and has got a good track record from another part of the world,' Bush claimed.
Arab-American groups have charged that there is racism in the opposition to the deal.
'This has the stench of racism about it,' said James Zogby, president of the Arab American Institute.
'These attacks on the United Arab Emirates are either irresponsible or uninformed, but they are downright shameful,' Zogby added.
Critics have also said that killing this deal would also be a further blow to America's image in the Muslim world.
Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld also attempted to defend the deal, calling the U.A.E., 'a country that's been involved in the global war on terror with us' and a country with which 'we have very close military-to-military relations, as well as political and economic relations.'
The controversy over port security is far from over.
