I haven't commented on the Port Ownership issue because I haven't figured it out. It seems odd that another country would want to own 6 ports in the US and it seems odder that the US would want to sell them. If you think if a port a purely a capitalistic endeavor then sure, globalization would mean foreign ownership could happen and even make sense. But ports aren't just economic means, they are part of our borders, in fact deliberate holes in our borders to allow things in and out. Protecting the borders is a fundamental responsibility of any government and outsourcing that responsibility seems crazy; particularly to a country that was a valued counterterrorism ally of the United States and a persistent counterterrorism problem.
Andrew Sullivan however points out that this whole issue really is a sidetrack from the real problem that our ports are vulnerable to terrorist attacks and are not being adequately secured. This is from the US Coast Guard and Department of Homeland Security. I don't even want to mention nuclear or chemical plant security which I'm sure is worse. Who is that keeps repeating "and Americans are safer?". Bleech.
3 comments:
I think the issue was about port operation rather then ownership. But that is, perhaps, semantics.
I am wondering if in US operation of other security sensitive enterprises (power stations, airports, etc) is outsourced and how. If it is common practise then the negative reaction to the port deal would seem narrowsided and disproportional. If it is, I would wonder about factors like contributations of port, etc operating companies to those politicians/groups that raised the issue...
Roman is correct, what is being sold is the right to operate the commercial activities of the port. The U.S. Coast Guard is legally responsible for oversight of port security.
Operation of infrastructure by "foreign" companies is not uncommon both in and out of the U.S. E.g. the British company BAA operates several major airports in the U.S. There are many examples of U.S. and non-U.S. companies owning energy assets and pipelines outside of their home markets.
UAE is one of the most progressive Middle Eastern countries in terms of economic progress and integration in the world economy.
My personal opinion is that discriminating against a company simply because it is headquartered in the Middle East is at best hypocritical.
And then I read articles like this one that quotes Carl Bentzel, a former congressional aide who helped write the 2002 act regulating port security: "They've been saying that customs and the Coast Guard are in charge of security; yes, they're in charge, but they're not usually present. The private terminal operators are almost always responsible for guarding the area around their facilities, although they must submit their security plans to the Coast Guard, which monitors and inspects them. In some cases, the companies X-ray incoming containers to see whether the contents appear to match the manifest, although customs agents are solely responsible for 'intrusive' inspections -- that is, opening containers and examining the cargo. That procedure is performed on about 5 percent of containers entering the United States."
Post a Comment