Possible Sale of U.S. ports to United Arab Emirates

[Matt Ruscher]

Kind of scary stuff that the Bush administration approved this to happen, but I dont want to get political in here. Heres the story:
http://articles.news.aol.com/news/article.adp?id=20060218210909990001&ncid=NWS00010000000001

[Tom Turner]

"Congress is welcome to look at this and can get classified briefings," Chertoff told CNN's "Late Edition." "We have to balance the paramount urgency of security against the fact that we still want to have a robust global trading system," he added.

A day or so ago, some official explained this Sale would be okay as the ports are all run by "Archie Bunker" types anyway.   :-o

Enough already!   This "deal" has to go!

[David Harrison]

Scary stuff!!!     It may be alright in peacetime. I just wonder what happens in wartime and who with???

[Andrew McAlpine]

I think that some points need to be clarified so everyone understands the full story regarding the so called sale of U.S ports.

Firstly the six ports that are being talked about are Vancouver,New Orleans,Miami,Baltimore,Philadelphia & New York/New Jersey.
At these ports there are seperate container terminals that are currently owned/operated by the(UK)company P&O Ports and or there u.s subsiduries, and it is only these terminals which will be effected & not every part of each port.

P&O Ports and its shareholders have agreed a 3.5 billion dollar take over by the fast growing ports company DP World based in Dubai, the take over has passed all (UK) and European regulatory herdles and is due to be complete by the first week in March.

DP World intends to keep the P&O name as part of the deal.

I have been following this story as I have a vested interest in it as i work in the (UK) ports industry & while I am very sad to see the 150 year history of P&O disappear through take overs & mergers i am very much aware that DP world want to invest in P&O itself.

I also agree that to have your ports run by a company from another country does not seem to be a great idea is but it has been this way in the uk and the u.s for some time, our largest cntr terminal (Felixstowe) is run by a chinese company (Hutchinson) which also owns thamesport, this company is also investing in another huge container terminal at Harwich.
In the u.s many of your terminals are owned or run by foreign companies from japan, korea etc.
the largest u.s terminal operator (Sealand) was sold the the danish maersk line a few years ago.

I appreciate the nowadays we in the west may need to be more carefull in our dealing with other countries but we must also remember that the ports industry is truly global with only a few large players left to run the ports our countries need and unfortunately these players are no longer from the uk or u.s but mainly from the emerging econimies of the middle east & asia.

I hope i may have clarified some point that the media seem to have overlooked just for a sensasional story.

[Charles McAllister]

As usual, the media have distorted what is actually happening to make headlines (for more money, of course). No one is selling any US ports to an Arab nation.  One non-US company is selling its commercial port facilities to another non-US company.  The new owners, as the present owners, will have to comply with government regulations for security, pollution control, labor practices, etc.  

Actually, most major corporations with headquarters in the US think of themselves as global corporations now.   As daywalker said, this is happening all over the world.  There are political theorists who say this is a good trend, since economic interdependence will prevent the outbreak of global warfare on the scale of WWII.  Others say having key industries in the hands of foreign ownership will lead to the weakening of security in the Western World and actually increase the chances of warfare between the West and groups of Near East or Far East countries.

We can only hope the first group is correct.

[Magogman]

all well and good and most of us on this list probably understand what is involved.  To put things in very common language that hopefully people here can understand the average U.S. citizen is not very knowledgeable about either economics, economic geography, the global economy and so on.  The U.S.,despite its far too many global forays into other country's business,remains very much an insular country just as it was before WWI---at least in the mind of the average Joe walking down the sidewalk of Main Street in the thousands of small towns in this country.  The mere idea that a foreign individual or corporation would own a U.S. corporation, or worse, land, is usually enough to get them yelling and screaming and making knee jerk reactions (trust me I amacollege professor living in a very small town in the Midwest and I know about which I am writing here!!!).  And when they hear a brief "newsbite" about an Arab company taking over U.S. ports, to them it is contrary to all they believe in.  In the U.S. vernacular, it is "the coyote guarding the henhouse."  I suspect neither the media or all of my idiot fellow citizens (the world is full of idiots and in the US we have our more than fair share!) really have an understanding ofexactlywhat is taking place.

My point is that even tho this move is a fairly routine one in the world of global commerce, the media has presented it in a way to insure a knee jerk negative reaction from what are called "red blooded Americans".

Truth is indeed stranger than fiction.

[Milind Balaji]

I totally agree with Mogogman's post above. The average US Citizen once again is being manipulated with threats of terrorism and a ' foreign power' being in control of our nation's ports.
DP corp is a global company like so many american corporations and has a business interest and most likely not a political one in taking over P&O's assets and terminals. I suspect this present hype over the take over of P&0 is yet another attempt by the media to make 'news' out of something that happens every day in the world. If they were so concerned, why not go and fact find on the level of saudi investment in this nation which always has and will presumably remain high. Saudi Arabia has for decades had friends in the upper enchelons of the government and through its business entities deals on a highly sensitive level with a lot of american companies. Saudi assets in this nation are spread all over and if the media want to probe national security concerns, then looking there might be a start.
American;s for years hav remained extremely insular and oddly enough being a 'global power' still find themselves in relative darkness when it comes to dealing with and truly understanding the world outside.
Just my 2 cents


Thanks,

Milind

[Tom Turner]

Yes, the media and the Senators are no doubt pandering to the fears of the "people" although the brazen "Archie Bunker" comment speaks volumes as to the on-going contempt for the average citizen. IS every long-shoreman now a racist?

Yes, the average Joe does have some concern that only Saudi Nationals were flying over American skies on the days immediately following "911".

While it has nothing to do with the "global marketplace" does anyone know who invited the "blind cleric" who was behind the first World Trade Center attack to come live amongst the American populace even above the objections of the INS?

One would think it was sophisticated folks in high places, eh?  And guess what?  No accountability.

[cazenove]

Coming from the so called "Developing world", i don't see what the fuss is all about. The "Western world", if i may use such a term wants to invest in the developing world and a lot of western leaders ask countries like India, China etc to open up their economies and let multinationals make investments.

At the same time, leaders in the west have problems opening up their own economies under the guise of "national security".

In todays globalised world, any business entity has to follow the laws of the land.Just because a terminal is run by a particular company, that does not mean that that particular company can do what it likes.

I was pleasently surprised to hear that Bush was willing to veto any opposition to the deal.

[rgr004]

About a year ago terminals operated by CSX were also sold to DP World as well. Did it lead to the same media show ?

The real question is the reason why some media and politics are behaving this way, is this done on purpose or because of lack of knowledge ? In both case it demonstrates their wide level of incompetancy in maritime subjects.

Some years ago it was congressmen also that pushed for double hull tankers. In aviation manufacturers build aircrafts that keep on flying when problem occur. Double-hull is of little value for high velocity collisions or groundings.

rgds / roland

[David Harrison]

In the Financial section of the Sunday Express (UK, it says Eller & Company, a P&O joint venture partner has already filed a lawsuit in Miami to prevent the deal with Dubai Ports World