Skip to main content

In an effort to save face and calm the public furor over the ports deal, Dubai Ports World (DPW) has agreed to "request" the 45-day investigation that should have been been conducted by CFIUS initially. DPW has also said it's delaying taking control over U.S. ports. Yet, as Think Progress points out, the delay is just a sham, and barring any Congressional action, the deal will be finalized on March 2.

So, this deal will go back to the same committee that approved of it unanimously.  Does anyone really believe that their conclusion will differ at all? More importantly, will the process of investigation be any better? In 2005, the non-partisan Government Accountability Office conducted a review of the Exon-Florio process and how CFIUS evaluates national security issues. (Hat tip to Kossack DC Pol Sci for the tip and pdf link.)

More below...

Its conclusion:

[The] Treasury, in its role as Chair, and some others narrowly define what constitutes a threat to national security--that is, they have limited the definition to export-controlled technologies or items and classified contracts, or specific derogatory intelligence on the foreign company. Other members have argued that this definition is not sufficiently flexible to provide for safeguards in areas such as protection of critical infrastructure, security of defense supply, and preservation of technological superiority in the defense arena. In one case, some member agencies would not agree with the Departments of Defense's and Homeland Security's using the authority of Exon-Florio and the Committee as a basis for an agreement that Defense officials believed necessary to mitigate national security concerns because the concerns did not, in the opinions of these Committee members, fit this narrow definition.

DOJ, Defense, and Homeland Security have argued for a broader definition of national security, but the Treasury and others have resisted. This may explain why Homeland Security was the only Department to object to the deal, though it was probably persuaded that its national security standard was not acceptable. Under the prevailing approach then, basically, unless the company has a rap sheet, then the deal can go through.

Meanwhile, today Senators Chuck Schumer (D-NY), Norm Coleman (R-MN), Bob Menendez (D-NJ), Olympia Snowe (R-ME), Hillary Clinton (D-NY), Susan Collins (R-ME), Tom Coburn (R-OK), and Jack Reed (D-RI) introduced emergency legislation concerning the Dubai deal. The legislation will:

  • Require the President to place a stay on DP World's takeover of P&O ports.
  • Require the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States commence an immediate 45-day investigation on the takeover's effects on national security. The bill also requires CFIUS to coordinate with other agencies, such as the Coast Guard, and to take in to consideration past security assessments of ports operated by DP World.
  • Require the Secretaries of Homeland Security and the Treasury to prepare a full report and brief members of Congress on their findings.
  • Upon receiving the report, Congress would have the authority to disapprove the sale within thirty days.

Notice how this legislation gives Congress--and not the President--the authority to kill the Dubai deal.  The 45-day CFIUS "investigation" is a sham. The President has already said he won't stop the deal. So it is up to Congress now to exercise its own judgment and decide whether the deal should go through.  With Republicans once again stepping back into line, it will be interesting to see how the vote on this bipartisan legislation will play out.

Originally posted to Daily Kos on Mon Feb 27, 2006 at 01:21 PM PST.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site