There is no way that Dubia Worl Port is the only company which can do this. What's so unreasonable about an American company performing this function?
The functionality of the company is not the issue here. American companies operate a number of port terminals all over the place. Maher Terminal in Port Newark (New Jersey), for example, is a private company that has a reputation as one of the best terminal operators in New York harbor.
The problem is that an independent terminal operator like Maher is in no position to pony up $6.8 billion to buy a major global corporate player like P&O Ports. And none of these global shipping conglomerates with terminal operations and maritime vessels all over the world are American-owned, because historically the nature of the global shipping business made it impossible for these companies to locate their headquarters in the U.S. due to our anti-trust laws.
Why didn't an American company submitt a proposal to manage them then?
It's perfectly reasonable, but no American company wanted the business.
Is Bush supposed to force an American company to take the business?
Look around. It is a global economy and only the largest and most efficient survive. All major corporations are multi-national either in customers or operations. I read this material a day or so ago. Sea2Sea.blogspot.com
Researching DP World shows they don't have the time under their belts that P&O has. They've grown hands over foot by locking up much of the Chinese trade. But what also is a fact with DP World is that they already are the port operations company for terminals in Germany, Romania, Saudi Arabia, South Korea, Australia, China, Morocco, India and Venezula.
Note.. there's alot of other democratic, and or friendly nations in this list with whom we already have with trade agreements. The point? The track record for DP World's performance in a few kindred nations indicates the fears have no grounds. Do you see other countries and their media running around like chickens with their heads cut off in a panic? Post 911, do you see Germany and Australia - already DP World clients - shopping around for another service provider in security fear?
Interesting since the ports are already under a foreign held or controlled company... What is even more interesting is that, despite lacking evidence that suggests DP World's port business increases terrorist threats, Congress is essentially saying "we don't want an Arab country buying this". Since that is the quintessential racial slur, they have to exclude everyone else - an action smacking of isolationism and intolerance.
...
Upon passage of such a bill, where does that leave us? Not unlike Halliburton's services, limited to few companies in the world, just how many competitors are on the par of P&O, and capable of managing the major US shipping ports?
Four crop up, including P&O... PSA Int'l (Singapore), Hutchison Whampoa (Hong Kong), and DP World (Dubai).
Da skinny.... P&O wants to sell.... and the only two bidders were PSA Int'l and DP World. PSA dropped out, so the only purchaser left was DP World... the subject of the current media hysteria. Then again, had PSA won the bid, they would have become the single largest ports operations group in existance. Would it then have become a monopoly battle? Fascinating....
It may be prudent to note that this same merger that has everyone in a tizzy also includes P&O assets, lease contracts, etc in Canada, Australia, Germany, and Spain, among others, as well. Yet none of these countries' are raising a stink about national security risks. Instead, the Brits lick their wounded pride, lamenting the sale of the historic maritime giant to other than UK hands.
There is nothing unreasonable about demanding scrutiny of this deal. What IS unreasonable is the demand to fast track and rubber stamp this thing. Furthermore, its a false argument to say that Dubai Ports World is the only company that can do the job. There are plenty of companies that can do it. The same lie is also said that illegals do jobs that Americans won't do.