Awesome. It's always good for Americans to be reminded who their true friends are.... and aren't. :)
-Dan
Posted on 03/09/2006 9:02:17 AM PST by prairiebreeze
Dubai is threatening retaliation against American strategic and commercial interests if Washington blocks its $6.8 billion takeover of operations at several U.S. ports.
As the House Appropriations Committee yesterday marked up legislation to kill Dubai Ports World’s acquisition of Britain’s Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation (P&O), the emirate let it be known that it is preparing to hit back hard if necessary.
A source close to the deal said members of Dubai’s royal family are furious at the hostility both Republicans and Democrats on Capitol Hill have shown toward the deal.
“They’re saying, ‘All we’ve done for you guys, all our purchases, we’ll stop it, we’ll just yank it,’” the source said.
Retaliation from the emirate could come against lucrative deals with aircraft maker Boeing and by curtailing the docking of hundreds of American ships, including U.S. Navy ships, each year at its port in the United Arab Emirates (UAE), the source added.
It is not clear how much of Dubai’s behind-the-scenes anger would be followed up by action, but Boeing has been made aware of the threat and is already reportedly lobbying to save the ports deal.
The Emirates Group airline will decide later this year whether it will buy Boeing’s new 787 Dreamliner or its competitor, Airbus A350. The airline last fall placed an order worth $9.7 billion for 42 Boeing 777 aircraft, making Dubai Boeing’s largest 777 customer.
Dubai in mid-February also established the Dubai Aerospace Enterprise, a $15 billion investment to create a company that will lease planes, develop airports and make aircraft parts to tap into growing demand for air travel in the Middle East and Asia.
The family-ruled sheikhdom may buy as many as 50 wide-body aircraft from Boeing and Airbus during the next four years, according to Aerospace Enterprise officials.
The UAE military also bought Boeing’s Apache helicopters. Meanwhile, Boeing has been in talks with the emirates to try to sell its AWACS planes.
An industry official with knowledge of Boeing’s contracts with Dubai said that the company has been involved in the emirate and that it would take a lot “to knock” those relationships.
“Nothing about the [ports] controversy diminishes our commitment to the region,” said John Dern, Boeing’s corporate spokesman. He added that at this point the company has no indication that there is or will be an impact on the company.
Any repercussion to Boeing could put House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) in a delicate position. Boeing’s decision to move its headquarters to Chicago has been seen as calculated to facilitate a close relationship with Hastert. He is against the ports deal, and his office did not return calls by press time.
Several businesses have expressed concern that the controversy over the $6.8 billion ports deal could damage trade with the UAE. Dubai is one of the seven emirates. The United States and the UAE are meeting next week for a fourth round of talks to sign a free-trade agreement. The American Business Group of Abu Dhabi, which has no affiliation with the U.S. government, said that Arabs may hesitate to invest into the United States, according to a report by Reuters.
A Republican trade lobbyist said that because the ports deal is a national-security issue blocking it would not be in violation of World Trade Agreement rules.
“In terms of them retaliating legally against the U.S. … I don’t think there are many options there,” the lobbyist said.
But when it comes to the emirates’ cooperation in the war on terrorism and in intelligence gathering, there is concern that some help may be pulled.
“If we reject the company in terms of doing the [ports] work, they are going to lose a lot of face. In the Arab culture, losing face is a big deal,” a former government official said. “We risk losing that help. It is not an empty threat.”
Dubai is a critical logistics hub for the U.S. Navy and a popular relaxation destination for troops fighting in the Middle East. On many occasions since the ports story erupted, the Pentagon has stressed the importance of the U.S-UAE relationship.
Last year, the U.S. Navy docked 590 supply vessels in Dubai, plus 56 warships, Gordon England, deputy secretary of defense, said in a Senate hearing last month. About 77,000 military personnel went on leave in the UAE last year, he added.
During the hearing, he warned about the implications of a negative decision on the ports deal: “So obviously it would have some effect on us, and I’d not care to quantify that, because I don’t have the facts to quantify it. It would certainly have an effect on us.”
Although owned by the Dubai government, the company at the heart of this controversy, Dubai Ports World, is trying to distance itself from any kinds of threats, said a lobbyist closely tracking the deal.
Another lobbyist monitoring the controversy said K Street still believes there will be a compromise that allows the Dubai deal to go through while meeting congressional security concerns, even though a bill aimed at that result, put forward by House Homeland Security Committee Chairman Peter King (R-N.Y.), was widely repudiated amongst lawmakers Tuesday.
Senate leaders have indicated that they would wait to take action until the new 45-day Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) review is completed.
Meanwhile, in London, DP World cleared the last hurdle for its take over of P&O. The Court of Appeal in London refused Miami-based Eller & Co., which opposed the deal, permission to appeal against clearances for the legal and financial measures necessary to implement the takeover.
P&O said it expects to file the requisite court orders, making the takeover terms binding on DP World, according to the Financial Times.
Elana Schor contributed to this report.
Yep.
Let's see.. denial, or even questioning a UAE business venture in the US is deserving of essentially kicking out all US assets and scraping many/all US contracts in the UAE.
Yeah.. seems reasoned to me.
Yeah.. seem like great allies to me.
Yeah.. gonna go buy a bridge now.
It is called strategery.
So it's not Bush's fault? It's ours!!!
So it's not Bush's fault? It's ours!!!
Wrong reaction. How many foreign countries will want to do business with the US now?
I worked as a commerial investment analyst on deals up to $1B; on deals more than that, the CFO had to sign off. Sometimes a deal just couldn't come together, despite working toward conclusion for nearly a year.
There are, at a minimum, tens of thousands of dollars involved in bringing a deal together. Include staff time and you're in the hundreds of thousands of dollars.
Every businessman who has been similarly shafted has threatened retaliation in some form. I don't blame the UAE in any way and would do the same.
I'm tired of threats by pissant countries. Screw them.
FOR SALE. large part of the north american continent, well developed. asking price? 7 billion in aircraft taken in trade.
Seriously, UAE would be very foolish to kick us out and they aint stupid just yet. If we are forced out, guess who will see an opening? Yep, the tall guy with many followers. This would be his dream as he has so often stated. And if he gets his own country, Saudia Arabia is soon to follow.
To all those who are now bashing those of us who wanted to make sure the ports deal was kosher, I can only say this to you.
TRILLIONS FOR DEFENSE, BUT NOT ONE CENT FOR TRIBUTE. You folks need to take some male hormone shots.
From the uniformed ramblings on this thread, you'd think this was the DU.
Do some research people, before you spout the Democratics talking points. This uproar is strictly political crap to make the Dems look strong on Security and you people are buying it hook, line and sinker.
We brought it upon ourselves.
their economy will be just fine. Dubai is increasingly replacing Bahrain as the playpen of the Middle East.
And now for my next prediction (I called this last night when the GOP idiots stuck that into the defense bill), I predict that the UAE will cozy up with Iran.
They don't want too, but we've absolutely screwed them on this. They opened their country to our men and women in uniform, but we are petty, I guess.
We're screwed. I hope Qatar doesn't kick us out.
That's the freeper way...
Just watch the cockroaches in Congress crawl back into their dark holes. To profess that we encourage our allies to help us in our war on terrorism and than back away from a fully vetted deal, as approved by Congress, is political suicide.
It's called "when you kick a guy in the nuts, you're probably off of his Christmas Party invitation list."
It seems to me this is a win/win for the Democrats. They get to damage the economy, alienate an ally in the war on terror, and make Bush look bad, all while posturing as defenders of our national security. What a coup, and credit must be given to their useful idiots on the Republican side who went along.
The knee jerk election-year scrambling to offend countries whose support we need in the WOT is making our nation less secure. I'm not surprised at it coming from DemocRATS, but some Republicans are also being nincompoops.
-Dan
I know. lol
What "bases" would we be giving them? Do you not understand? We are guests in THEIR ports, and they are threatening to kick us OUT if we block this deal. I don't blame them - we're about to bend them over when they have been very helpful.
bfl
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.