|
|||||
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
 |
 |
    |
|
|
|||
 |
|
||
|
|||
|
|
|
|
||||||||
|
Bush Defends Port Deal
U.S. President George W. Bush today defended a deal in which a United Arab Emirates company will take control of six major U.S. ports, the Associated Press reported (see GSN, Feb. 22). “The more people learn about the transaction, the more they'll be comforted that the ports will be secure,” Bush said at the end of a Cabinet meeting. The president cautioned against sending “mixed messages” by protesting the deal, saying security concerns did not exist when a British company controlled the ports. “This wouldn't be going forward if we weren't certain our ports would be secure,” Bush said Details of the $6.8 billion sale are beginning to emerge. Routine restrictions were not part of the pact, according to documents obtained by AP. Those include keeping records on U.S. soil where they are subject to U.S. courts, and appointing a U.S. citizen to deal with government requests. Dubai Ports, for its part, said if requested it would deliver documents concerning “foreign operational direction” and pledged to continue participating in programs to detect weapons of mass destruction. James Lewis, a former U.S. official who has worked on similar deals, said the terms of the pact were “not lax, but they’re not draconian.” He said that if the White House anticipated this backlash, “they might have made them sound harder.” Bush’s defense of the agreement did little to quell criticism of the deal from Capitol Hill. “There is a very serious question as to why the records are not going to be maintained on American soil subject to American jurisdiction,” said Representative Peter King (R-N.Y.). “These new revelations ask more questions than they answer,” added Senator Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.). Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice in Lebanon today said that the United Arab Emirates was a “a very good ally” and “if more details need to be made available then I'm sure they will be.” “This is supposed to be a process that raises security concerns, if they are there, but does not presume that a country in the Middle East should not be capable of doing a deal like this,” Rice said (Ted Bridis, Associated Press/Yahoo!News, Feb. 23). Meanwhile, U.S. Customs and Border Protection said that surveillance at maritime ports has increased dramatically since Sept. 11, 2001, Agence France-Presse reported yesterday. Customs said 9.6 million shipping containers, or 26,000 per day, went through U.S. ports in 2004. Officials said they fear that a nuclear weapons or radiological “dirty bomb” could be held in such a container. The United States and other countries in 2002 began to Container Security Initiative, which calls for identification and inspection of suspect containers at foreign ports before they are shipped to U.S. soil. The United States has also developed a second program with importers called the Customs Trade Partnership Against Terrorism. Importers are asked to identify and fix vulnerabilities in their business practices. Ships heading to the United States must alert the U.S. Coast Guard before reaching shore. “Ostensibly, the flurry of U.S. government initiatives since 9/11 suggests substantial progress is being made in securing the global trade and transportation system,” wrote security expert Stephen Flynn in the last edition of the Far Eastern Economic Review. “Unfortunately, all this activity should not be confused with real capability.” Flynn also said he was concerned that a nuclear weapon or dirty bomb would not be detected by sensors at ports. “This is because nuclear weapons are extremely well-shielded and give off very little radioactivity,” he said (Jerome Bernard, Agence France-Presse/Yahoo!News, Feb. 22).
| ||||||||||
Back to top
