Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Fact Sheet: The CFIUS Process And The DP World Transaction
White House ^ | February 22, 2006 | Office of the Press Secretary

Posted on 02/23/2006 1:50:22 PM PST by Cboldt

For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
February 22, 2006

Fact Sheet: The CFIUS Process And The DP World Transaction

"If there was any chance that this transaction would jeopardize the security of the United States, it would not go forward. The company has been cooperative with the United States government. The company will not manage port security. The security of our ports will continue to be managed by the Coast Guard and Customs. The company is from a country that has been cooperative in the war on terror, been an ally in the war on terror. The company operates ports in different countries around the world, ports from which cargo has been sent to the United States on a regular basis."

- President George W. Bush, February 21, 2006

President Bush Strongly Supports The Decision To Move Forward With The DP World Transaction

The Administration, As Required By Law, Has Reviewed The Transaction To Make Certain That It Does Not In Any Way Jeopardize National Security. Under the process conducted by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), officials carefully reviewed the national security issues raised by the transaction and its effect on our national security. Twelve Federal agencies and the government's counterterrorism experts closely and carefully reviewed the transaction to make certain it posed no threat to national security.

DP World Has Provided Strong Security Assurances To The United States. DP World has signed a letter of assurances making commitments to meet and maintain security standards for the port terminals that they will own and operate in the United States. There are a number of safeguards that are in place in the agreement, and the American people should feel confident that the transaction will in no way harm the security of the Nation's ports.

DP World's Bid For The London-Based Peninsular And Oriental (P&O) Steam Navigation Company Was Announced Last Fall. DP World, a UAE-based commercial entity, is purchasing the U.S. subsidiary of the London-based P&O Steam Navigation Company. The announcement of DP World's bid for P&O was made in November 2005, and the news was widely reported in the press and international financial trade publications. The formal CFIUS process was set into motion in December, and the Federal government conducted a thorough review to ensure that port security would in no way be compromised by the deal.

The Administration Has Taken A Principled Position Based On The Security Of Our Nation And Careful Review Of The Transaction. The President has made clear that he stands firmly behind the decision to allow the DP World transaction to move forward. Preventing this transaction by a reputable company to go forward after careful review would send a terrible signal to friends and allies that investments in the United States from certain parts of the world are not welcome.

The Port Security Of the United States Is The Administration's First And Foremost Concern

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Is Always In Charge Of The Nation's Port Security, Not The Private Company That Operates Facilities Within The Ports. Nothing will change with this transaction. DHS, along with the U.S. Coast Guard, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, and other Federal agencies, sets the standards for port security and ensures that all port facility owners and operators comply with these standards.

The Transaction Is Not About Port Security Or Even Port Ownership, But Only About Operations In Port. DP World will not manage port security, nor will it own any ports. DP World would take on the functions now performed by the British firm P&O - basically the off- and on-loading of cargo. Employees will still have to be U.S. citizens or legal permanent residents. No private company currently manages any U.S. port. Rather, private companies such as P&O and DP World simply manage and operate individual terminals within ports.

Background On The CFIUS Process

The CFIUS Process Was Rigorously Followed, And CFIUS Agencies Carefully Reviewed The Transaction. Ensuring the protection of our national security is the top priority of all members of CFIUS. In reviewing a foreign transaction, CFIUS brings together 12 Federal agencies with diverse expertise to consider transactions from a variety of perspectives and identify and analyze all national security issues.

# # #


TOPICS: Government
KEYWORDS: cfius; dubai; ports; whitehouse
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-29 next last

1 posted on 02/23/2006 1:50:24 PM PST by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
February 22, 2006

Fact Sheet: The United States-UAE Bilateral Relationship

"But I also want to repeat something again, and that is, this is a company that has played by the rules, that has been cooperative with the United States, a country that's an ally in the War on Terror, and it would send a terrible signal to friends and allies not to let this transaction go through."

- President Bush, 2/21/06

"[T]he military-to-military relationship with the United Arab Emirates is superb. ... They've got airfields that they allow us to use, and their airspace, their logistics support. They've got a world-class air-to-air training facility that they let us use and cooperate with them in the training of our pilots. In everything that we have asked and work with them on, they have proven to be very, very solid partners."

- General Peter Pace, Chairman Of The Joint Chiefs Of Staff, 2/21/06

The United Arab Emirates (UAE) Is A Longstanding Friend And Ally Of The United States. The United States and UAE have a longstanding alliance. The UAE is a key partner of the United States in the War on Terror, helping to advance Middle East peace efforts. The UAE is also a vibrant trading partner and has provided critical support in the wake of Hurricane Katrina.

The UAE Is A Key Partner In The War On Terror. The UAE provides U.S. and Coalition forces unprecedented access to its ports and territory, overflight clearances, and other critical and important logistical assistance. Today, the UAE is providing assistance to the missions in Afghanistan and Iraq, combating terrorists by cutting off their financing, and enhancing America's homeland security by actively participating in initiatives to screen shipments and containers.

The UAE Is Supporting Middle East Peace Efforts. The UAE is a moderate Arab state and a long-time supporter of all aspects of Middle East peace efforts. The U.S. and the UAE are also working together to create a stable economic, political and security environment in the Middle East.

The UAE Provided $100 Million To Help The Victims Of Hurricane Katrina. The UAE was one of the first nations to offer financial aid to the U.S. after Hurricane Katrina struck the Gulf Coast. UAE's $100 million donation was one of the largest by any nation.

# # #

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/02/print/20060222-10.html

2 posted on 02/23/2006 1:54:41 PM PST by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

More from the White House - a VERY extensive defense.

Published September 20, 2005; Relisted at WH website on Februay 21, 2006
The National Strategy for Maritime Security

Seppech on February 21, 2006
President Discusses Port Security

3 posted on 02/23/2006 2:00:30 PM PST by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt
Didn't have to read past the second sentence to find misinformation. The company is not a private company as implied, it's a branch of a foreign government.
4 posted on 02/23/2006 2:03:20 PM PST by BubbaTheRocketScientist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: BubbaTheRocketScientist
DP World, a UAE-based commercial entity,

Nicely stated. Implies it's a private or publicly owned corporation, when in reality DP World is a state-operated organization, no more than a part of the UAE government.
5 posted on 02/23/2006 2:05:16 PM PST by BubbaTheRocketScientist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt
The Transaction Is Not About Port Security Or Even Port Ownership, But Only About Operations In Port. DP World will not manage port security, nor will it own any ports. DP World would take on the functions now performed by the British firm P&O - basically the off- and on-loading of cargo. Employees will still have to be U.S. citizens or legal permanent residents. No private company currently manages any U.S. port. Rather, private companies such as P&O and DP World simply manage and operate individual terminals within ports.

We say again:
No private company currently manages any U.S. port. Rather, private companies such as P&O and DP World simply manage and operate individual terminals within ports.

Get it MSM morons?

6 posted on 02/23/2006 2:06:51 PM PST by Mike Darancette (Condimaniac)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt

Thanks Cboldt for the comprehensive compilation of facts. I shall bookmark it right now. Hopefully more Freepers shall better understand what the issue involves. To much knee jerking going on at present.


7 posted on 02/23/2006 2:09:44 PM PST by Marine_Uncle (Honor must be earned)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt
http://production.investis.com/po/rns/rnsitem?id=1133247817nRNSc8063U
http://production.investis.com/po/rns/rnsitem?id=1133247826nRN2c8063U
http://production.investis.com/po/rns/rnsitem?id=1133247821nRN1c8063U

These are the terms of sale of P&O to DPI.. a lot of myths are busted here.. especially the big one Hannity keeps repeating that this isn't public information..
8 posted on 02/23/2006 2:10:01 PM PST by mnehring (Perry 06- It's better than a hippie in a cowboy hat or a commie with blue hair.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BubbaTheRocketScientist
Try NSCSA.com The whole argument is bogus. National Shipping Company of Saudi Arabia owned by Saudis owns US port terminals and has been doing business in such since 1979. All this political and MSM propaganda.
9 posted on 02/23/2006 2:16:22 PM PST by jec41 (Screaming Eagle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Marine_Uncle
Absolutely.

This should be on this thread as well: The UAE news of the purchase

This really was recent news; it was just voted.

10 posted on 02/23/2006 2:18:20 PM PST by BuglerTex
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Marine_Uncle
Hopefully more Freepers shall better understand what the issue involves. To much knee jerking going on at present.

"At present"? LOL. Situation normal. I rather enjoy the flame wars. ;-)

11 posted on 02/23/2006 2:18:51 PM PST by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: mnehrling
Good links to the proposed terms of sale and buyout offer of late November ... I'll "liven" them. I found the same thing under different links, and posted some of the language to point out that the deal isn't done until the conditions are satisfied.

http://production.investis.com/po/rns/rnsitem?id=1133247817nRNSc8063U
http://production.investis.com/po/rns/rnsitem?id=1133247826nRN2c8063U
http://production.investis.com/po/rns/rnsitem?id=1133247821nRN1c8063U

... especially the big one Hannity keeps repeating that this isn't public information.

The CFIUS meeting and analysis isn't a public affair, but the proposed buyout is old news.

12 posted on 02/23/2006 2:22:29 PM PST by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: BubbaTheRocketScientist
no more than a part of the UAE government. Which is itself a privately held entity...sort of. Out here.
13 posted on 02/23/2006 2:24:00 PM PST by BuglerTex
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt

Oddly, not one of the White House's argument in these talking points you have cited addresses any of the criticisms being labeled at the deal.


14 posted on 02/23/2006 2:28:47 PM PST by MarcusTulliusCicero
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: jec41
National Shipping Company of Saudi Arabia owned by Saudis owns US port terminals and has been doing business in such since 1979.

Point being? It's okay to let more foreign governments operate our ports because somebody in the past had the bad judgment to let that kind of thing happen?

All this political and MSM propaganda.

Agreed, too much propaganda being thrown around over this issue. Just like this press release glossing over the fact that a foreign government will be operating our ports.
15 posted on 02/23/2006 2:29:38 PM PST by BubbaTheRocketScientist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt

I have been guilty of recommending this site to people. Sometimes I wonder if it was a wise move.


16 posted on 02/23/2006 2:31:33 PM PST by Marine_Uncle (Honor must be earned)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: BuglerTex
"This really was recent news; it was just voted."
Yes but as has been pointed out, the deal was known and fully discussed in public arena since November of 2005. In other words, L/MSM and other sources made public comments on the future deal. Nothing has been done in secret.
17 posted on 02/23/2006 2:36:24 PM PST by Marine_Uncle (Honor must be earned)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Marine_Uncle
I have been guilty of recommending this site to people. Sometimes I wonder if it was a wise move.

I still do, with the caveat that signal to noise can be really bad at times. BUt the rule "you can't believe everything you read or hear" applies here too - the benefit of "here" is that both sides are usually argued, which is a stark contrast to most of the media.

That said, the character of FR has changed much, and several times. It's less of a news gathering and serious forum now, and more of an echo chamber with sharply defined factions breaking primarily on party-line.

18 posted on 02/23/2006 2:36:35 PM PST by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt

Roger that long timer. I had sensed a shift just since the short time I have been here.


19 posted on 02/23/2006 2:52:30 PM PST by Marine_Uncle (Honor must be earned)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: BubbaTheRocketScientist
Point being? It's okay to let more foreign governments operate our ports because somebody in the past had the bad judgment to let that kind of thing happen?

Point being we don't own any international shipping lines and if we don't give them access we can't ship. Most don't know the difference between port terminals and seaports. In the NY port of entry (seaport) there are ~102 terminal ports. The two that Dubai are buying are about 2000 ft of docking access. Its the same as a International Land-port or International Airport. If you don't buy or lease a terminal you can't land. American, United, British, France and Dubai Airlines when landing at a Airport have to go to different terminals they have leased or purchased or they can't land at that airport. When leaving the passengers or cargo have to go through airport security before entering any terminal. When arriving the passengers and cargo have to go thorough customs when leaving the terminal. Its the same with port terminals in seaport or land-ports. The security is handled by the sea or air port not by any port terminals.

20 posted on 02/23/2006 2:57:00 PM PST by jec41 (Screaming Eagle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-29 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson