Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
CC - Item 5B - US Ports with Dubai Ports World Discussion
• TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS VFEBRURARY MEAD CITY O CIL FROM: MANAGER DATE: 23, 2006 • RE: DISCUSSION OF CONTRACTING OF UNITED STATES PORTS WITH DUBAI PORTS WORLD This item is being placed on the agenda at the request of Councilmember Clark. As you know this has become a controversial issue on both sides of the aisle. Attached is information from Congresswoman Hilda Solis as well as articles from CNN, Fox News, and USA Today. RECOMMENDATION After discussion it is recommended that he Council direct staff to prepare the appropriate correspondence. COUNCIL AGENDA 2/28/06 Item No: V - B 0 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS FROM: A& JITY MANAGER DATE: 1 FEBRURARY 23, 0 RE: DISCUSSION OF CONTRACTING OF UNITED STATES PORTS WITH DUBAI PORTS WORLD This item is being placed on the agenda at the request of Councilmember Clark. As you know this has become a controversial issue on both sides of the aisle. Attached is information from Congresswoman Hilda Solis as well as articles from CNN, Fox News, and USA Today. RECOMMENDATION After discussion it is recommended that he Council direct staff to prepare the appropriate correspondence. Feb-23-06 03:18pm From-Congresswoman Hilda L Solis (CA-32) • 626 448 806E T-112 P 001 F-845 Office of Congresswoman Hilda L. Solis 32nd Congressional District of California 4401 Santa Anita Ave., # 2111 Ell Monte, CA 917311 Phone: 626-448-1271 FAX: 626-448--8062 ✓ 4716 Cesar Chavez Ave. I Los Angeles, CA 900221 Phone: 323307-9904 FAX: 323-307-9906 1725 Longworth HOB I Washington, DC 20515 Phone: 202-225-5464 1 FAX: 202-225-5467 EA IX To: 1 Date: r C7` ~j O tion: Pages: S Phone Fax (6 ( From: Benita Duran 11 Anela Freeman ❑ Elena Henry ❑ Nicole Jaramillo 11 Diana Kawai [I Llanet Martin O Margarita Pinon ~S Deborah Nevarez Peter Hsu ❑ Intern 0 Comments: Feb-23-06 03:19pm From-Convesw an Hilda L Solis (CA-32) 626 448 8062 T-112 P 002 F-845 r ~ G ~ Il STATEMENT BY THOMAS A. SCHWEICH CHIEF OF STAFF U.S. MISSION TO THE UNITED NATIONS U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE BEFORE THE SENATE HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS COMMITTEE, PERMANENT SUBCOMMITTEE ON INVESTIGATIONS ON THE UNITED NATIONS OIL-FOR-FOOD PROGRAM FIRST SESSION, 109"` CONGRESS MAY 17, 2005 I Feb-23-06 03:19pm From-Conuesan Hilda L Solis (CA-32) 626 448 8066 T-112 ? 003/025 F-845 Mr. Chairman, distinguished members of the Committee, I welcome this opportunity to appear before you today to discuss the UN Security Council's management of the multilateral sanctions regime on Iraq, including oversight of the Oil-for-Food Program, and the ways in which the United States, with strong support from the United Kingdom, attempted to compel Member State adherence to the restrictive measures on the former Saddam regime. Mr. Chairman, In previous testimony before this and other Congressional committees investigating Oil-for-Food matters, my colleagues and I have tried to delineate the various ways in which Saddam Hussein attempted to undermine and subvert the comprehensive sanctions imposed by the UN Security Council on Iraq under Resolution 661 (1990) following Saddam's invasion of Kuwait in August 1990. Given the focus of today's hearing, it is important to note that Saddam's efforts to evade the sanctions were facilitated through the cooperation and complicit involvement of various parties outside Iraq. In my April 12 testimony before the International Relations Subcommittee of the House Government Reform Committee, chaired by Congressman Christopher Shays, I referred to what I described as a pull- down menu of manipulative mechanisms that Saddam employed to circumvent the sanctions. I said that these included surcharges, the topping off of oil loadings, influence pedaling, product substitution, product diversion, phony service contracts, phantom spare parts, shell corporations, illusory performance bonds, hidden bank accounts, and plain old-fashioned bribery and kickbacks involving millions of dollars. While the United States, with strong support from the United Kingdom, attempted to counter Saddam's efforts at non-compliance, we often were met with resistance by those States, including members of the ITN Security Council, and, hence, participants on the Iraq Sanctions "661 Committee, who may have been benefiting economically and financially from their ongoing relationships with the Saddam regime, particularly under the UN Oil-for-Food (OFF) Program. Feb-23-06 03:18pm 626 448 8062 T-112 P 004/025 F-845 9 From-Congresswoman Hilda L Solis (CA-32) I1 Saddam cleverly exploited these avenues for non-compliance by granting oil and humanitarian supply contracts to those willing to bend the rules in Iraq's favor. So when, for example, the United States and the United Kingdom attempted to institute an oil pricing policy in the 661 Committee, which became known as "retroactive pricing," that was aimed at reducing or eliminating unauthorized excess charges being imposed by the Iraqi Government on oil export contracts, certain 661 Committee members strongly resisted our efforts. In that instance, we were able to use the consensus rule of the 661 Committee to our advantage to withhold our consent to oil prices proposed at the beginning of each month by Iraq's State Oil Marketing Organization (SOMO), until we were able at the end of the: month to determine whether the proposed prices reflected "fair market value" in comparison with other comparable crude oils. By all accounts, our strategy succeeded in greatly reducing oil surcharges from fifty cents per barrel to about five cents per barrel, thereby reducing the involvement of oil middlemen who, according to the UN Oil Overseers, contributed nothing to Iraq's oil export efforts under the Oil-for-Food Program. Mr. Chairman, 661 Committee members with strong economic interests in Iraq used numerous tactics both procedural and substantive to delay or oppose our attempts, in coordination with the British, to achieve compliance with the sanr,`lons. Mr. Chairman, The combined efforts by Saddam to avoid compliance with the sanctions, coupled with the willing acquiescence of certain governments to permit unauthorized deviation from the measures, made it increasingly difficult for the United States and the United Kingdom to maintain the effectiveness of the restrictions, despite our best efforts. Much of what the U.S. could and could not achieve with regard to monitoring the Oil-for-Food Program and implementing the sanctions was directly related to the political situation surrounding the contentious issue of Iraq in the Security Council and in the 661 Committee. Our efforts to keep the comprehensive sanctions reg'ine in place for as long as we did, from August 1990 until May 2003, despite its inevitable weakening, far exceeded the expectations of policymakers at the time the restrictions were first imposed. Mr. Chairman, in the time remaining for my prepared testimony, I would like to cite two examples of the types of problems we and the British faced in our dealings in the 661 Committee. One situation we attempted to Feb-23-06 03:19am From-Congresswoman Hilda L Solis (CA-32) 626 448 Bib T-112 P 005/025 F-845 • correct, only to be met with stiff resistance from other Committee members, involved the unauthorized flow of oil through the Iraq-Syria pipeline, a violation we repeatedly criticized both in our public statements and in our discussions with other Security Council and 661 Committee members. During an October 2002 meeting of the 661 Committee, we requested an explanation as to the apparent discrepancies between the amount of oil Syria produced domestically, the amount it consumed domestically, and the total annual volume of oil that Syria exported. The Syrian representative, a member at the time of the 661 Committee, with support from other delegations, questioned the reliability of the figures we quoted, which we had drawn from publicly available oil industry publications. Another delegation, seeking to deflect the focus on Syria, suggested the Committee's work would be more effective if alleged sanctions violations were not considered singularly and in isolation, but rather were viewed in the relative context of other reports of non-compliance. A second example to which I would draw your attention involved the use of ferries traveling from the United Arab Emirates to and from Iraq, ostensibly authorized only to transport passengers and their immediate possessions, not commercial goods. In a series of 661 Committee meetings, we it-.id the British repeatedly objected to giving permission to the governments of Bahrain, Oman and Qatar to initiate their own ferry service to Iraq unless and until the illegal practices of the ferries operating from the UAE first were stopped. We specifically took such action because several successive briefings to Committee members by the Commander of the Multinational Maritime Interception Force (MIF), operating in the Persian Gulf, confirmed with photographic evidence that commercial goods and supplies were being loaded onto ferries in the UA.E in direct violation of previously agreed Committee rules governing ferry service. Other 661 Committee members severely criticized us and the British for linking our decision to block Committee approval of ferry service from other Gulf states to the ongoing problems associated with ferry service from the UAE to Iraq. HoNvever, we maintained our opposition to new ferry service and requested that steps be taken to compel the government of the UAE to exercise greater control over ferries departing from its ports to Iraq. Finally, Mr. Chairman, concerning the oil voucher program established by Saddam allegedly to reward those individuals, groups, and entities who had helped the Iraqi regime, I would like to offer two observations: 4 Feb-23-06 03:20pm From-ConQre6 an Hilda L Solis (CA-32) 626 448 804 T-112 P 006/025 F-845 a) knowing now of the existence of such a program, in retrospect, possibly helps to explain why certain members of the Security Council and the 661 Committee fought so strenuously with us and the British to abandon our retroactive oil pricing policy, to release our holds on what amounted by the Spring of 2002 to 5.4 billion dollars in humanitarian goods contracts, and generally to ease the restrictive measures against Iraq; and, b) had we and the British known at the time of Saddam's efforts to influence individuals, groups, and other governments by means of an institutionalized, secret oil allocation program, we likely would have considered other strategies to address sanctions non-compliance and the apparent influence-peddling in which Saddam was extensively engaged. Mr. Chairman, I have intentionally limited the length of my formal statement in order to permit additional time for questions from you and the other Committee members. I know you are aware that there are some limitations as to what I can say in an open briefing. I will attempt to answer all your questions within the confines of U.S. law limiting public dissemination of classified material. Should you and other Committee members seek additional information pertaining to classified material that might require a closed hearing, I stand ready to provide you with whatever details you may desire. Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity of appearing before the Committee today. I am happy to answer questions when you so indicate. Feb-23-06 03:20pm From-Consre man Hilda L Solis (CA-32) 626 448 86 HOMELAND SECURITY Daily Wire 'PHE 13US114ESS REPORT 2un5 _\nal~~ur-~ ~\'itc, hoc. T-112 P 007/025 F-845 rss archives I home subsclibe advertise about privacy contact Bush threatens veto as Republican leaders join intensifying fight against port deal President George Bush, in an effort to contain a rapidly escalating rebellion among leaders of his own parry, said yesterday That he would veto any legislation ainuzg to block a deal for a Dubai-owned company to rake over the management of port terminals in .,L\ mayor U.S. porn, among them New York, Miami, and Baltimore. Wcre he to veto a putative congressional ban on the deal, it would be Bush's first veto. The administration was stunned by the growing outcry against the deal, with the latest blow beuig public criticism by Senatc majority leader Bill Frisr (R- Tennessee) and the House speaker Dennis Hastcrt (R- Illinois). Both leader., said a thorough review of the deal and its security implications was necessary to ensure ;hat tcrrori~cs could not exploit the arrangement to sGp weapons into American ports. Bush suggested that the objections to d1e deal might be based on bias against a company from the Middle Last. "I will fight harder than ever for this legislation, and if it is vetoed I will fight as hard as I can co override it," said Representative Pete King (R-N.Y.), chairman of the I-louse Homeland Security Committee. Kung and Democratic Senator Charles Schumer of New York slid they will introduce emergency legislation to suspend the port., deal. -read more in David 5angcr s and Eric Upton 's New York Times report 22 February 2006 17:41 htto;//Www•hsdailywire.com/printPage.php?name=888 2/23/2006 Feb-23-06 03:20pm From-Conar *man Hilda L Solis (CA-32) 626 448 80;6 T-112 P 008/025 F-845 for over NEWS COLUMNISTS OBITUARIES SPORTS BUSINESS OPINIONS HEALTH ENTERTAINMENT TRAVEL FOOD COFFEE BREAK INFO SUBSCRIBE SERVICES J~ PLACE AN AD J~ sgvtribune.aom A,Z Latest from the Today's AP News Summary: Radio I Video More: Video Gallery ) Multimedia Gallery ) Today in JAP ASSWated Press History I Sports Gallery I This week in photos In other news: U.S. I WORLD ) BUSINESS ( PERSONAL FINANCE ) TECHNOLOGY i SPORTS ENTERTAINMENT ) HEALTH I SCIENCE ) POLITICS ) OFFBEAT ) RAW NEWS ) WEATHER Latest from the Associated Press more)))) Feb 22, 9:44 PM EST Delay Says Bush Making Mistake on Port HOUSTON (AP) - U.S. Rep. Tom DeLay said Wednesday that President Bush is making a big mistake backing a sale of shipping operations at six major U.S. seaports to a state-owned business in the United Arab Emirates. The former Republican majority leader said the administration's approval of the deal is "pretty outrageous." DeLay made the remarks during a campaign event with Houston real estate executives. Separately, U.S. Rep. Ted Poe, R-Humble, said he is concerned about Texas ports where military cargo is handled by London-based Peninsular and Oriental, the company to be purchased by the UAE's Dubai Ports World. Poe said ports in Beaumont and Corpus Christi move military goods, materials and records of which he would not want UAE employees to have access. Concerned lawmakers from both parties have noted Advertisement that some of the Sept. 11 hijackers used the United Arab Emirates as an operational and financial base. COMPARE Mortgage Rates at NexTag.com "We would be bringing trouble upon ourselves," Poe said. "I've heard the UAE is our friend on the war on 30 Year Fixed terror, despite the past, but they may not be our friend tomorrow. Choose State "They would have access to every manifest regarding ' Refinance s shipping, all cargo going out, what's on it, where it HexYag going and all incoming shipping coming back to the port." httu://ho$Wd.ap.org/dynamic/stories/P/PORT SECURITY_DELA.'Y?SITE=CAWES&SE... 2/23/2006 Feb-23-06 03:21 pm From-Conare4an Hilda L Solis (CA-32) 626 448 8062 T-112 P 009/025 F-845 John LaRue, director for the Port of Corpus Christi. said he appreciates Poe's concern, but says ports such as his have experience in working with foreign companies. "I understand that he wants to review the process Interactive& that went on. I think most people need that sort of interpretation," he said. "At the same time, ports all Harry Reid's Ties to Abramoff over the U.S. are run by companies like Dubai." Delay and Blunt: Following the Rep. Solomon Ortiz, D-Corpus Christi, said he too is Money concerned about military shipments handled by a UAE govemment-owned company. Timeline.- Abramoff Investigation "I think in the world we are living in today, we need to take all the precautions necessary, and I think there DeLay's Lifestyle is a lack of oversight," he said. "So many of us in Congress are disappointed there was insufficient oversight on this." At the Port of Houston, one of the nation's largest pons, Peninsular and Oriental handle freight and have longshoremen load and unload ships, but there is no military cargo moved, port officials said. The port's Executive Director Thomas Komegay said any deal with the UAE company won't change security operations or efficiency, "They load and unload the ships, but we have the cargo checked by the customs and border protection," Komegay said. "And the U.S. Coast Guard does all the terminal security and checking the vessels before the come into the port. That is not going to change." Still, DeLay said the deal would be overturned by Congress. "When it's a matter of national security, the president will be overturned" DeLay said in an account that appeared on the Web site of the Austin American- Statesman- "We will overturn it within the next few weeks." Congress Goes to Bat for Tribes Latest News Senator Challenges Ports Deal Procedure Senate Bipartisan Group Seeks Lobby Reform DeLay Says Bush Making Mistake on Port Ohio Democrats Shying Away From Ney Race McCain: Bush Must Do More on Immigration Documents Indictment Against Rep. Tom Delay Second Indictment Against Delay Motion to Quash Filed by Delay's Attorney The White House said Wednesday that President Buy AP Photo Reprints Bush was unaware of the pending sale until it already '~1! had been approved by his administration. The administration also said that it should have briefed Congress sooner about the transaction, which has triggered a major political backlash among Republicans and Democrats. In the Houston area, DeLay faces Tom Campbell, Michael Fjetland and Pat Baig in his Republican primary. Democrat Nick Lampson, a former congressman, is unopposed and will face the GOP winner in November. DeLay resigned his House leadership post amid Republicans' concern about a corruption scandal tied to lobbyist Jack Abramoff. He's also awaiting a Texas trial on money- http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/P/PORT_SECURITY DELAY?SITE=CAWES&SE... 2/23/2006 Feb-23-06 03:21 Pm From-Conarefman Hilda L Sobs (CA-32) 626 448 80§Z T-112 P 010/025 laundering charges connected with the transfer of $190.000 in corporate contributions donated to candidates through a Texas political action committee he founded. ® 2006 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. Learn more about our Privacy Policy. b Purchase this AP story for repnnt. F-845 Sponsored Links Hot Stock Picks from The Stockster Free stock picks from The Stockster that will turn your portfolio into a monster performer in days. Bookmark our page and watch our performance. We return huge profits in days not years! www.thestockster.com Strong Buy Analyst Report for EPMI Free analyst report for EPMI with a strong buy recommendation. Special situation with huge upside potential. www.epicmediainc.com/AnalystReport.html Home Loans for Bad Credit Homeowners Mortgage loans for homeowners with bad credit. Pay off bills with a home refinance loan from Countrywide home loans. Free consultation. No obligation. Fast call. Start today. www.countrywide-FSL.com listed nXq.. Your Local Real Estate FIesource I Ih ilk S O MI I Debt Consolidation ans H L Shopping Cart Las vegas hotels Business Card Design Monitor Paintball Guns Personalized Christmas Gifts E ome o Product Tests Vacations Auto insurance Personalized Gifts & Favors ` Mortgage Popcorn Machines Direct Find aupairs & nanny search Ayn Rand Copyright Notice Privacy Policy Copyright © 2005 Los Angeles Newspaper Group htm•llhnctrrf san nro/cIvnImic/StOrie. (P/PORT' SECVFITY DELAY?SITE=CAWES&SE... 2/23/2006 Feb-23-06 03:21 Pm From-Conare4an Hilda L Solis (CA-32) NEWS COLUMNISTS OBITUARIES SPORTS BUSINESS OPINIONS HEALTH ENTERTAINMENT TRAVEL FOOD COFFEE BREAK INFO SUBSCRIBE SERVICES PLACE AN AD 626 448 806 T-112 r 011/025 F-845 Latest from the Today's AP News Summary: Radio I Video More: Video Gallery ) Multimedia Gallery Today in ApAssociatedPMSS History Sports Gallery I This week in photos In other news: U.S. ) WORLD ) BUSINESS I PERSONAL FINANCE ) TECHNOLOGY SPORTS I ENTERTAINMENT I HEALTH ) SCIENCE ) POLITICS I OFFBEAT ) RAW NEWS ) WEATHER Latest from the Associated Press more»» Feb 23, 4:06 PM EST Senator Challenges Ports Deal Procedure By TED BRIDIS Associated Press Writer WASHINGTON (AP) - The senior Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee angrily accused the Bush administration Thursday of ignoring the law by refusing to extend an investigation of a United Arab Emirates company's takeover of significant U.S. port operations. Bush, talking to reporters at the conclusion of a Cabinet meeting earlier Thursday, said that "people don't need to worry about security." "The more people learn about the transaction that has been scrutinized and approved by my government," Bush said, "the more they'll be comforted that our ports will be secure." Clashing with a Treasury Department official on a mission to calm a political uproar, Sen. Carl Levin said the law has language specifically requiring a longer review than the one that an interagency committee conducted, if a business deal could affect national security. "Is there not one agency in this government that believes this takeover could affect the national security of the United States?" the Michigan Democrat asked at a committee briefing. Chairman John Wamer, R-Va., in a very unusual procedure on Capitol Hill, allowed reporters to question the administration witnesses. The Treasury official, Deputy Secretary Robert AUvertmement http://hosts.d.ap.org/dynamic/stories/P/PORTS SECURITY?SITE=CAWES&SECTION=... 2/23/2006 Feb-23-06 03:22pm From-Conttre man Hilda L Solis (CA-32) 626 448 80 16 Kimmitt, and officials from other agencies said a multiagency group spent three months reviewing the port deal and said that all concerns about security were satisfied. "We're not aware of a single national security concern raised recently that was not part of" the three-month review, Kimmitt said. Levin insisted that the law that established the multiagency panel specifically said that any such review should be lengthened by 45 days if it could have an impact on national security. T-112 P 012/025 F-845 Levin, raising his voice at the briefing, told Kimmitt, 4))Senator Carl Levin, D-Mich., "If you want the law changed, come to Congress and ranking Democrat on the Senate change it but don't ignore it." Armed Services Committee, during committee briefing: Levin Kimmitt responded, 'We didn't ignore the law. " says he surprised none of the government agencies felt the deal Concems were raised. They were resolved. involved national security. (cut used in wrap) Warner then jumped in to assure Levin that he would ask Attorney General Alberto Gonzales to prepare a AP VIDEO memorandum on the administration's interpretation . of the law. Levin also questioned the UAE's past record on terrorism matters, saying the country backed the Taliban and allowed financial support for al-Qaida. He said the UAE has an "uneven history" as "one of Port Security Hearings on only a handful of countries in the world to recognize Capitol Hill Thursday the Taliban regime in Afghanistan." He added that millions of dollars in al-Qaida funds went through Interactives UAE financial institutions. Harry Reid's Ties to Abramoff Levin at one point noted that a special commission that investigated the terror attacks against the United " ' Delay and Blunt: Following the there s a States on Sept_ 11, 2001 concluded that Money persistent counterterrorism problem represented by the United Arab Emirates." Timeline: Abramoff Investigation "Just raise your hand if anybody (at the witness table) talked to the 9-11 commission," commanded Levin. There was no response among the handful of DeLay's Lifestyle administration representatives. Congress Goes to Bat for Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton. 0-N.Y., also was Tribes critical, calling the approval process "a failure of judgment" because officials "did not alert the Latest News president, the secretary of the treasury and the secretary of defense" that several of our critical ports Senator Challenges Ports Deal would be turned over to foreign country. Procedure Sen. John Wamer, R-Va., and chairman of the Senate Bipartisan Group Seeks committee, emphasized UAE's cooperation in the Lobby Reform war on terrorism, noting that it allows a large number of port calls by U_S. military and commercial ships DeLay Says Bush Making and that it had made its airfields available to the U.S. Mistake on Port military But when a round of questioning began, Warner Ohio Democrats Shying Away From Ney Race http:/Ihosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/PIPORTS_SECURITY?SITE=CA WES&SECTION=... 2/23/2006 Feb-23-06 03:22pm From-Congre woman Hilda L Solis (CA-32) 626 448 Bib T-112 P 013/025 F-845 sharply asked Kimmitt whether the reviewing agencies considered UAE's role's in the transfer of money to al-Qaida and of nuclear components to rogue nations. Kimmitt said those factors were taken into account. McCain: Bush Must Do More on Immigration Buy AP Photo Reprints Under secret conditions of the agreement with the administration, the Dubai company promised to cooperate with U.S. investigaCwns as a condition of the $6.8 billion deal, according to documents obtained by The Associated Press. Latest News The U.S. government chose not to impose other, routine restrictions. The president said he was struck by the fact that people were not concerned about port security when a British company was running the port operation, but they felt differently about an Arab company at the helm. He said the United Arab Emirates was a valuable partner in the war in terror. U.S. Has Quiet Relationship With Ally, UAE Quotes on Port Security PHOTO GALLERY Critics in Congress, even before Thursday's hearing, had noted that the London-based Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Co., which previously operated at those ports, is a publicly traded company Port Security while Dubai Ports World is effectively controlled by the government there. Sens. Robert Menendez, D-N.J., and Clinton have said they will introduce legislation to prohibit companies owned or controlled by foreign governments from running port operations in the United States. Bush said his administration would continue talks with members of Congress - Republicans and Democrats alike - who have rebelled against the takeover. He said the briefings were "bringing a sense of calm to this issue." "This wouldn't be going forward if we weren't certain our ports would be secure." Bush said. In approving the purchase, the administration chose not to require Dubai Ports to keep copies of its business records on U.S. soil, where they would be subject to orders by American courts. It also did not require the company to designate an American citizen to accommodate requests by the government. Outside legal experts said such obligations are routinely attached to U.S. approvals of foreign sales in other industries. Dubai Ports agreed to give up records on demand about "foreign operational direction" of its business at the U.S. ports, according to the documents. Those records broadly include details about the design, maintenance or operation of ports and equipment. It also pledged to continue participating in programs to stop smuggling and detect illegal shipments of nuclear materials. 'They're not lax but they're not draconian," said James Lewis, a former U.S. official who worked on such agreements. If White House officials negotiating the deal had predicted the firestorm of criticism over it, "they might have made them sound harder." The conditions over the sale were detailed in U.S_ documents marked "confidential." Such records are regularly guarded as trade secrets, and it is highly unusual for them to be made public. hn.//hp$tCd,a,g,g>;g/dynamic/stories/P/PORTS SECURIT'Y'?SITE=CAWES&SECTION=... 2/23/2006 Feb-23-06 03:22pm From-Congress oman Hilda L Sobs (CA-32) 626 448 806 T-112 P 014/025 F-845 16 Rep. Peter King of New York, the Republican chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, said the conditions are evidence the administration was concerned about security. "There is a very serious question as to why the records are not going to be maintained on American soil subject to American jurisdiction," King said. Another critic, Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., added: "These new revelations ask more questions than they answer." In Lebanon, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Thursday that the agreement was thoroughly vetted in a review process that took approximately three months. "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." She described the United Arab Emirates as "a very good ally" and said "if more details need to be made available then I'm sure they will be." ® 2006 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published. broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. Leam more about our Privacy Policy. lk Purchase this AP story for reprint. Sponsored Links Hot Stock Picks from The Stockster Free stock picks from The Stockster that will turn your portfolio into a monster performer in days. Bookmark our page and watch our performance. We return huge profits in days not years! www.thestockster.com strong Buy Analyst Report for EPMI Free analyst report for EPMI with a strong buy recommendation. Special situation with huge upside potential. www.epicmediainc.com/AnalystReport.html Home Loans for Bad Credit Homeowners Mortgage loans for homeowners with bad credit. Pay off bills with a home refinance loan from Countrywide home loans. Free consultation. No obligation. Fast call. Start today, www.countrywide-FSL.com ( ecjg here Your Local Meal Estate Resource ~s° Horn Debt Consolidation Shopping Cart Business Card Design Paintball Guns Home Loans Las vegas hotels Monitor Personalized Christmas Gifts ` Product Tests Vacations Auto insurance Personalized Gifts & Favors Mortgage Popcorn Machines Direct Find aupairs & nanny search Ayn Rand Copyright Notice Privacy Policy Copyright m 2005 Los Angeles Newspaper Group hitp://hosted. ap.org/dynamic/stories/PIPORTS_SECURIT'Y?SITE=CAWES&S ECTION=... 2/23/2006 Feb-23-06 03:23pm From-Conpre oman Hilda L Solis (CA-32) 626 448 80 T-112 P 015/025 F-845 16 E low hr;N`W LjVrk Cmmi POi NTEf~•ifileMIS i ll SMM:ORED fO El FOB r 'C.n IC-5.:c77.1 February 23, 2006 Bush Aides Stand Firm, Saying Port Deal Raises No Alarms By DAVID STOUT WASHINGTON, Feb. 23 - Bush administration officials insisted today, in the face of deep skepticism and resentment from Democratic senators, that the deal to turn over American port operations to a Dubai company was closely studied beforehand and had raised no alarms about national security. The officials said the United Arab Emirates, of which Dubai is a part, was a crucial ally of the United States in the war on terror, not an unreliable entity in the volatile Middle East as some have suggested. "They do stand side by side with us in the war on terror," Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon England told a session of the Senate Armed Services Committee. Mr. England said the Emirates and the United States had a military partnership under which the United States provides the Emirates with the latest American fighter aircraft and the Emirates, in turn, provide all-important logistical support for the American military. Robert Joseph, undersecretary of State for arms control, called the Emirates "a stalwart ally" and "a long-standing friend of the United States," a rock of stability in the Mideast and a vital supporter of the United States' military campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan. Moreover, he said, the Emirates were among the first to back tighter security measures for handling cargo containers. But it was clear from the outset that Democrats would be difficult to convince, and that they were still smarting from. what they consider high-handed treatment from the Bush administration. Senator Carl Levin of Michigan, the ranking Democrat on the panel, said the White House had kept Congress in the dark about the impending deal - a deal Mr. Levin said had him "deeply troubled" because of the Emirates' "uneven history" in combating terrorism. Even the committee chairman, Senator John Warner, a Virginia Republican who praised the Emirates' cooperation with the United States, said "a full and complete factual picture" was essential, and that the picture has been late in emerging. Mr. Levin said President Bush's threat to veto any Congressional measure to upset the deal with Dubai Ports World simply showed how "out of touch" Mr. Bush is, with the American people and with members of Congress, for whom he shows "presidential disdain." Senator Fdwixd M. Kennedy. Democrat of Massachusetts, said he found it "remarkable" that the White House seemed to have been stuprised by the furor over the impending port deal. "We cannot risk contracting out our national security," he said. hna;I/W WW,ilYgiXp~$.com/2006/02/23/politicsl23 end-port.html?ei=5094 &en=43 6974707c0... 2/23/2006 Feb-23-06 03:23pm From-Conor roman Hilda L Solis (CA-32) 626 448 8JO T-112 P 016/025 F-845 But public officials who support the deal with Dubai Ports World, and some experts on shipping, say that the location of a port company's headquarters is of little importance in this day of global commerce. that cargo at American ports will still be handled by American workers, and that in any event the Coast Guard and Customs agencies will retain responsibility for security. As for any suggestions that the impending takeover by the government-owned Dubai company had somehow glid!d through the Bush administration bureaucracy, Mr. England said the review "definitely was not cursory, and it definitely was not casual." If the furor over the port deal should go on, Mr. England said, it would give enemies of the United States aid and comfort: "They want us to become distrustful, they want us to become paranoid and isolationist." CoDYright.2006The_New York Times Company Home Privacy Policy (Search Corrections ( XML I Help I Cont http://www.lnytimes.com/2006/02/23/politics/23cnd-port.html?ei=5094&en=436974707c0... 2123/2006 Feb-23-06 03:23pm From-Congres~voman Hilda L Solis (CA-31) 626 448 806 T-112 P 017/025 F-845 wltc `cla J1orkMmco Washington PRESENTING THE 1 Blackberry ~v=" N BlackBern/°9 The C~LI. 7 functionality you love cLOI-IEF QQ V70ac NYTimes.com Go to a section SEARCH SPONSORM Bt SEa6htN NYT Since 1981 ~ Search NEWS ANALYSIS Big Problem, Dubai Deal or Not BY DAV.I.D E. SAI C;ER Sign into E-Mail This Published: February 23, 2006 Printer_Friendly. WASHINGTON, Feb: 22 - in the political collision between the Reprints White House and Congress over the $6.8 billion deal that would Save-Article give a Dubai company management of six American ports, most Lz1iC:E ToaL> experts seem to agree on only one major point: The gaping holes in with the nationality of d li l SP]N'GRE_ B. RUNK YOU F o e to tt security at American ports have B SN10KIN~ F who is running them. The deal would transfer the leases for ports in New York, Related Baltimore and Miami, among others, from a British-owned P_odcnst:_Pavid k,_Sanger. company to one controlled by the government of Dubai, part M '1'hc Times's Wh.te House of the United Arab Emirates. But the security of the ports is Past 2, correspondent reports on the port still the responsibility of Coast Guard and Customs officials. 1. Wh wntroversy - Subsgribe I All P-odcasts • "0% tn Foreign management of American ports is nothing new, as 2. To:_ _ the role already played by companies from China, 3. c'rr rancl, Suyv No SCcuriry TsCUZ in Singapore, Japan, Taiwan and trading partners in Europe 4. SDK Pgrt-Contract, Officials Say_ attests. 5. Qa% (February 23, 2006) Go t Work at Jerminalc tlntouch_e.d by While critics of the deal have raised the specter that it might Firestorm. of Sceuriry_Uebate open the way to the "infiltration" of American ports by _ (Fcbruuy 23, 2006) terrorists from the Middle East, the Dubai company would t1.S. Sees Etnirntes.as Both Ally and, Sincc9/I l,.a Foe (Pebruury in most cases inherit a work force that is mainly American, 23, 2006) with hiring subject to the same regulations as under the Dubai sees Bias t3e11n(I Storm current British management. (February 23, 2006) Bush, would Veto Any.13i11 Among the many problems at American ports, said Stephen httn•111mvw nvtime.S.couW2QQ6/02/23/politicS/23assess.htcnl?n=Top%2fNews%2flnternatio... 2/23/2006 Feb-23-06 03:23pm From-Conar Oman Hilda L Sobs (CA-32) 626 448 86 T-112 P 018/025 F-845 (February 22, 2006) E. Flynn, a retired Coast Guard commander who is an New.York Mayor Seeks to W icld expert on port security at the Council on Foreign Relations, lnflucnr~e on Security at Cruise "who owns the management contract ranks near the very The-n( Terminal (February 22, 2006) bottom." Palaki_Joins OppositiA1 tip A160 in Takeover of Ports (February 21, It is clear that the questions involving the Dubai company, 200, ,4 200, 2006) have become a proxy for long Dubai Ports World - 200- Mnre, Objecrions_to Part 7 akeover , simmering debates about security and a battleground for r~Arab Entity (February 20, » 006 resurgent tensions between the Wliite House and Congress. 2 ) 2.Scnators_Szek_to Stop Ports In the end, as Mr. Bush has discovered, the politics of AQVEF Dcal, Ci.tJM5ecurity (February globalization are local and emotional. 18, 2006) Dcspite Fears. a Dubai Company, The unstated assumption behind the Democratic and Will HcIP faun Ports in New York Republican critique of the deal is that transferring corporate (Februarry 17, 2006) responsibility for the port terminal leases to a conservative Qil's a-Means, Ti,x an EpO-at Muslim country that bred two of the Sept. 11 hijackers 13p¢ai Inc, (February 17, 2006) increases the likelihood of another act of terror. Dubai Wins. Biddjn~ Rattle for P _tC O. (February 11. 20066) try Some independent experts, like Dr. Irwin Redlener of the P.obin a The ( lp inio Z- storrn National Center for Disaster Preparedness at Columbia University, warn of the risk that "a lot of critical information about the movement of cargo is now accessible to new Readers" Opinions " owners. Forum: ti-aTip al Security Mr. Bush, however, has suggested that the criticism of Arab ownership may have racial overtones. And in interviews Wednesday officials of Peninsular & Oriental Ports North America, the British company that now manages the six terminals, dismissed the criticism as the imaginings of politicians who have little familiarity with American ports. "We will still exist, with the same workers, and the same facility security plan, regulated by the same Coast Guard and Customs officials," Michael Seymour, who runs the operation, said in sketching what would happen if the Dubai company took over the management role. ".And we'll be audited just as often - maybe more often." Such arguments are not likely to quell the debate, which is already turning to the question of whether the Bush administration cut some corners in speeding the review through the approval process to avoid the scrutiny that could touch off a political firestorm. Among other battles playing out are whether the Bush administration is spending enough money on port security and whether it is focusing its energies on the right problems. hnp://www.nytimes.com/2006/02l23/politics/23 assess_hnnl?n=Top%2fNews%2flntematio... 2/23/2006 Feb-23-06 03:24pm From-Consr 6man Hilda L Sobs (CA-32) 626 448 8j6 T-112 P 019/025 F-845 Another is whether the White House's case on port security is harmed by the fact that the major player is the Department of Homeland Security, whose failures after Hurricane Katrina will be the centerpiece on Thursday of a White House-directed report on "lessons learned" from ';he multiple failures in the devastation of New Orleans. "The management of these ports is the door which you walk through to get to all of these other questions," said Senator John Kerry, Democrat of Massachusetts, who, like Mr. Bush, used cargo ports as the backdrop for speeches about the post-Sept. 1 I world in 2004. "It raises a lot of questions about the lobbying, the connections and the terms of the deal, and the security problems the administration has left unaddressed." It is also convenient for the Democrats, who are able to sound more hawkish on domestic security than President Bush. Mr. Bush finds himself burdened with the more nuanced argument that turning down this deal would send a message to the entire Arab world that it is not to be tasted, no matter how friendly individual countries may have been. The administration's core problem at the ports, most experts agree, is how long it has taken for the federal government to set and enforce new security standards - and to provide the technology to look inside millions of containers that flow through them. Only 4 percent or 5 percent of those containers are inspected. There is virtually no standard for how containers are sealed, or for certifying the identities of thousands of drivers who enter and leave the ports to pick them up. If a nuclear weapon is put inside a container - the real fear here - "it will probably happen when some truck driver is paid off to take a long lunch, before he even gets near a terminal," said Mr. Flynn, the ports security expert. That is when e. concerns about Dubai come in. While the company in question has not been a focus of investigations, Dubai has been a way station for contraband, some of it nuclear. Abdul Qadeer.Khan, the Pakistani nuclear engineer, made Dubai his transshipment point for the equipment he sent to Libya and Iran because he could operate there without worrying about investigators. "I'm not worried about who is running the New York port," a senior inspector for the International Atomic Energy Agency said, insisting he could not be named because the agency's work is considered confidential. "I'm worried about what arrives at the New York port. That port, a'.Ong with the five others Dubai Ports hopes to manage, are the last line of defense to stop a weapon from entering this country. But Mr. Seymour, head of the subsidiary now running the operations, says only one of the six ports whose fate is being debated so fiercely is equipped with a working radiation-detection system that every cargo container must pass through- -6f+r,41..n.nv n.rt;mPC rnMIMOF CIVIL/no]ities/23assess-html?n=Top%2fNews%2flnternatio... 2/23/2006 Feb-23-06 03:24Pm From-Congr Oman Hilda L Solis (CA-32) 626 448 Bib T-112 P 020/025 F-845 Closing that gaping hole is the federal government's responsibility, he noted, and is not affected by whether the United Arab Emirates or anyone else takes over the terminals. Next_Article in_tN_ashingt2n_(3.Qf 4j ? Eck bore to download a copy._zToday's New York Tiumcs RELA'T'ED ARTICLES or Seeks to Wield Influence on Secur1i.tyA1Sruise Terminal (February 22, 2006) Mgre Objections to Port_TakeoveLhy~_Arab Entity (February 20, 2006) DAspic Fears a Dubai Company Will Help Run Ports_in New York (February 17, 2006) lnsurancc Premiums Rise As Threats to Ships Grow (August 25, 2005) RELATED SEA%.RCHES Terrorism I Ships and Shiupin ' puhai Ports World, I United Arab.Emirates INSIDE NYTTMES.COM WSIrker, Win Qlv, mpics Jack Vettri.2p% Frnm the Dakota S.D. LAwmakcr5 ord jack t rAriy central the Peonle's.A!?isl to chz Dantibc. Votc te_Ran_4borttn. ~~i Rc_4._ Copyright 2006Yhe New-Yogic Times Company tipme I Privacy-Policy I Search I Co¢eCtions I XML I Help I Contact.Us Work f htm-r/)Arwty nvtimr;N.GomT 2QQO/Q2/Z3/politics/23assess.html?n=Top%2fNews%2f]ntennatio... 2/23/2006 Feb-23-06 03:25pm From-Congresswoman Hilda L Solis (CA-32) 626 448 80 T-112 P 021/025 F-845 • Wednesday, Marth, 24. 2004 Area port workers cite shoddy security Some say post-9111 changes make them feel less, not more, secure, By TAD VEZNER The Orange County Register WASHINGTON -Workers on the waterfronts of Los Angeles and Long Beach insist that despite official claims that American seaports are growing more secure, recent changes in security methods are making them feel less safe than before the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. At the largest port complex in the nation, current federal regulations allow private terminal operators to oversee their own security - something that was proven insufficient at the nation's airports, where federal employees now screen luggage and passengers. Port safety will be the subject of a hearing this morning before the Senate commerce committee. Some dockworkers at L.AAong Beach say safety has been thrown overboard in the name of commerce. They cite Cutbacks in checking protective cargo container "seals" since Sept. 11. The seals, usually metallic bolts. show signs of tampering during transit. Cutbacks in checking empty containers since Sept. 11. Empties often are left unattended in and around the ports after being unloaded. Easy access to terminals by civilians and truckers showing only driver's licenses and lacking full security clearances- L ittie increase in the amount of cargo screened by customs officials. Federal officials say they have doubled inspections to 5.4 percent of incoming containers. Many dockworkers say they have seen only about 2 percent scanned. Industry officials counter that seal checks do not affect safety - especially with regard to terrorism - and that automated systems that scan and cross-check incoming truckers' manifests are improving security. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., who has fought for increased federal funding for port security, calls them "the soft underbelly of the nation" in the war on terror. The ports of L.A. and Long beach constitute the third- largest port complex in the world, handling 40 percent of U.S. imports and more than two-thirds of Asian imports. Connected to a high-volume rail system that stretches all the way to Maine, the twin ports are at the heart of the American industrial economy, with capillaries stretching to stores and factories in every state. Stores like Wall-Mart and Target and Asian automakers all rely on the Asian supply chain for manufactured goods. During the 2002 port strikes, the U.S. economy lost an estimated $1 billion a day. But that would be small change compared with the cost of a terrorist bomb going off on Terminal Island - an incident that would shut the ports indefinitery, causing a chain reaction of factory closings across the nation. And some port workers say that scenario is all too likely. "If I was a terrorist, I could blow this place to smither eens. It's a crime," said Joe Jackobelly, chief supervisor of Evergreen terminal, one of the larger container terminals at the Port of Los Angeles. Feb-23-06 03:25pm From-Congresswoman Hilda L Solis (CA-32) 626 448 8J6 T-112 P 022/025 F-845 10 "They used to check containers coming off-ship three years ago. Now, they dons" "We have a stack of letters from operators that have recently ceased doing seal and empty checks," said Mike Mite, port security director for the International Longshore and Warehouse Union. Mitre is scheduled to testify at today's hearing. One such letter, dated May 2003, states that Marine Terminals Corp., which runs three terminals at L.A./Long Beach, 'rill be eliminating seal number verification and empty inspections on all equipment entenng the terminal." Next month, three more terminals at the two ports will eliminate seal and empty checks at gates, leaving only three of the 13 container terminals checking seals. Industry officials say unions are trying to save jobs, and the reason for the cuts are simple: Seals don't help when it comes to terronsm. "The chance of interference in transit is relatively remote," said Doug Tilden, CEO of MTC. "We should be more worried about point of origin - whars going into the containers in the first place." While Tilden and other industry officials admit they no longer check cargo coming off-ship, by April, 10 of the 13 termiral operators will have replaced manual checks at their land-side gates with optical scanners that check the licenses of incoming drivers and the cargo information against manifests sent by trucking companies. Everything must match, or clerks stationed in towers hundreds of feet away will grow suspicious But Jackobelly is skeptical. 'Three months ago, we finally caught two truckers using the same license," he said. Rep. Loretta Sanchez, D-Garden Grove, a homeland-security committee member, agreed. "It's so easy to get into the grounds of the ports." she said. Michael O'Hanlon, a Brookings Institute cargo security expert who testified before Congress last March, is alarmed that humans are now out of the loop. "Automation still requires some level of human interaction," he said. Govemment officials also are worried. "Stopping seal checks is definitely a matter of concern." said homeland-security committee Chairman Rep. Christopher Cox, R-Newport Beach. The Coast Guam agrees: Under its Maritime Transportation Security Act - a set of new security standards to go into effect July 1 - all seats must be checked. "I know terminals see security as inconvenient and costly, and it's hard to gauge a best return on any investment," Port of Los Angeles Capt. Peter Neffenger said. "But after July 1, we will prosecute any violations. It's part of the new cost of doing business." At leas. one terminal operator agrees that mote regulation is needed "if it's important enough for security, its important pngggh to be MgndateV said Earl Agron, security director for Eagle Marine $orvices, the only operator using the new automated system that also hand- checks empties, and also the only terminal that increased security when the national terror-alert system went'to Orange' last year. Feb-13-06 03:25pm From-ConQre6oman Hilda L Solis V-32) 626 448 86 T-112 P 023/025 F-845 "The federal government insists on this security, but it's got to provide some of the help," Feinstein said. Cox has expressed confidence that future federal programs will address the problem. "Clearly, it's a system that needs dramatic changes," he said. "Fortunately, those changes are under way." Those include a new transportation-worker identification card that will have biomet6c data and require security checks of all truckers. Federal officials say they are making headway in increasing cargo screening. In January, Robert Jacksta, chief of border security for customs, said 5.4 percent of all cargo was being scanned in such a manner - more than twice what it was before. Port workers insist customs officials are not scanning more cargo than they used to. Local customs officials say they can't comment on exact percentages at the ports because they don't want terrorists. to go "port shopping." But they do say the number of port inspectors has risen from 159 to 325 since 2001. "We don't get hung up on the number," said Vera Adams, director of customs for the ports. 'We inspect 100 percent of cargo that needs to be inspected. We don't want to waste time on low-risk stuff." But Adams did tell Cox that there has been a 776 percent increase in cargo inspections since the terrorist attacks. Whatever the exact number, Sanchez sees a problem. At the port, she has seen containers filled with illegal immigrants instead of televisions. "A lot of time the manifests are bad, the data is bad," Sanchez said. Cargo expert O'Hanlon also has a problem with the numbers: "We definitely need to be in double digits," he said. Wednesday, March, 24, 2004 Port security initiatives Current Both ports have received S81 million in federal grants for such things as fencing, lighting and cameras. This year, projects include a water-side surveillance system ($3 million) and perimeter barriers ($3 million). Next month: Area Maritime Security Committee will complete a local port security plan, covering regional issues at the ports of Los Angeles, Long Beach, Heuneme and the Santa Barbara area. July 1: Maritime Transportation Security Act begins to be enforced by U.S. Coast Guard. The MTSA is a federal set of comprehensive security guidelines that all port facilities must follow. Octobry^ Fixed radiation detection portals to be installed at all outgoing container terminal gates. Portals will scan all exiting cargo. Port statistics Feb-23-06 03:25pm From-Conir 6 Oman Hilda L Sobs (CA-32) 626 448 816 T-112 P 024/025 F-945 Number of containers that passed through L.A./Long Beach in 2003: Estimates vary from 7 million to 12 million. Estimated number of containers this year. 14 million to 16 million. Per cent of country's imports that enter U.S. through L.A./Long Beach: 40 percent Percent of imports from Asia that go through L.A./Long Beach: 70 percent Number of U.S. workers dependent on port: estimated 2 million Sources: International Longshore and Warehouse Union, Pacific Maritime Association, Port of Long Beach Feb-23-06 03:26Pm From-Congresswoman Hilda L Solis (CA-32) 626 448 806 T-112 P 025/025 DAILY MESSAGE POINTS Below are message points on the Bush Administration-United Arab Emirates Dubai Port deal. Please use them in your comments to the press. February 23, 2006 The Bush-Dubai Port Deal: Failing to Keep America Safe at Home • The United Arab Emirates Dubai Pon deal is another example of how the Republicans are failing to keep America safe at home. • The Bush Administration is poised to hand over terminals at six major U.S. ports to a company controlled by the United Arab Emirates, even though the bipartisan 9/11 Commission has identified America's seaports as particularly vulnerable to terrorist attacks because only 6 percent of cargo containers entering our country are screened. F-845 • Democrats are concerned about the deal because two of the 9/11 hijackers were citi2ens of the emirates, some of the financing for the 9/11 attacks came from the emirates, and the government of the emirates was one of only three countries in the world to recognize the former terrorist-backed Taliban regime in Afghanistan. • The Bush Administration disregarded a law requiring a rigorous 45-day security investigation, instead sealing the transaction after a secret review lasting just 23 days. • Democrats want to keep Americans safe at home by following the bipartisan 911 Commissions recommendations to strengthen security at our ports, notgiving access to countries that may have ties to terrorists. CNN.com - Bush: No need to worry about port security - Feb 23.2006 0 0 M.Com. Bush: No need to worry about port security President tries to calm uproar over planned UAE takeover Page I of 3 Cam, PRINTTHIS Powered by rj OickaE71(ry WASHINGTON (CNN) - President Bush on Thursday defended his administration's decision to allow a company from an Arab country to operate six major U.S. ports, saying, "People don't need to worry about security." 'This deal wouldn't go forward if we were concerned about the security for the United States of America," Bush told reporters during a Cabinet meeting. He emphasized that "port security will be run by U.S. customs and the U.S. Coast Guard." Dubai Ports World is set to finalize a $6.8 billion purchase next month of the British firm Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Co., which manages the U.S. ports, including those in New York and Miami, Florida. (See where the ports are) The administration's blessing of its purchase by the United Arab Emirates firm has triggered an avalanche of criticism on Capitol Hill. At a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing Thursday, Sen. Carl Levin, the panel's ranking Democrat, lashed out at Bush, calling his threat to veto any congressional attempt to block the deal "out of touch." The Michigan lawmaker accused Bush of a "presidential disdain for outside views in general and congressional views in particular." At his Cabinet meeting, Bush questioned whether a double standard was being applied to a Middle East company, saying "I find it interesting that it's OK for a British company to manage ports, but not OK for a company from a country that's also a valuable partner" in the war on terror. Bush added, "It's really important that we not send mixed messages to allies." He said that administration officials will continue talks with members of Congress so that "people understand the logic of this decision." Critics of the deal have raised concerns about the company's status as a state-owned venture, accusing the UAE of having ties to terrorism. Two of the hijackers involved in the September 11, 2001, attacks came from the Persian Gulf country, and most of the money for the plot was funneled through the banking center of Dubai. Critics also note that Dubai was a key transfer point for illicit nuclear technology sales to North Korea, Iran and Libya that were led by Pakistani scientist A.Q. Khan. "At a time when we're faced with this terror threat, we should not be surrendering any port to any foreign government, let alone the UAE," said Baltimore, Maryland, Mayor Martin O'Malley, whose city is one of the ports involved in the deal. The dispute pits Bush against many of his allies in the congressional leadership, including House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Illinois, and Senate Majority Leader Bill Fdst, R-Tennessee. Top Democrats have opposed the deal as well, calling on Bush to rescind his administration's approval pending further review. (Watch how members of both parties oppose deal - 1:14) http://cnn.worldnews.printthis.clickabil ity.comlptlcpt?action=cpt&title=CNN.com+-+Bush... 2/23/2006 CNN.com - Bush: No need to worry port security - Feb 23, 2006 • Page 2 of 3 L] White House spokesman Scott McClellan said Wednesday that critics are misinformed but conceded that members of Congress should have been consulted earlier. Dubai firm: 'Security is a marketing tool' Ted Bilkey, chief operating officer of Dubai Ports World, said the company "will fully cooperate in putting into place whatever is necessary to protect the terminals." "We're going to do anything possible to be sure that this deal goes through," Bilkey said. (Watch a company official defend the deal - 7:39n Senior officials in the Department of Homeland Security said late Wednesday that Dubai Ports World was being held to a higher standard than other international companies that operate in U.S. ports. Foreign-owned companies operate many ports in the United States. For example, in Los Angeles, California, companies from China, Denmark, Japan, Singapore and Taiwan lease operations. Bilkey said U.S. customs officers in Dubai inspect cargo containers headed for American ports as part of a port-security effort his company supports. "We have given them the sovereign right to inspect any container they wish to before it's loaded on a vessel," he said, calling fears that officials would turn a blind eye to terrorists "nonsense." "Security now in our business is a marketing tool," he said. "The shipping companies want to know that you run a secure operation." Company hires Dole to lobby The UAE has a high-level delegation in Washington to gamer support for the deal, and the company has hired former Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole to lobby for it. Dole was the Republican presidential candidate in 1996, and his wife. Elizabeth, is a U.S. senator from North Carolina. Bush picked up support Wednesday from Sen. John McCain, R-Arizona, who urged his fellow lawmakers not to rush to judgment. The chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Sen. John Warner, R-Virginia, said the UAE is a vital American ally in the Persian Gulf, a frequent stop for the U.S. Navy and Air Force, and a supply station for U.S. troops in Iraq. Treasury Secretary John Snow, whose department chairs the review panel - the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States - said any shortcoming in the panel's work "was in explaining this process and in having this process understood by our critics." 'This is scare politics' Abdel Khaleq Abdullah, a professor at UAE University, said the opposition appears to include "a bit of bigotry." "If it was an African country or a European country or an Asian country, it would not have been subjected to this kind of scrutiny," he said. "But since this is just purely an Arab country, I think it just stopped some of the lawmakers who are making a big deal out of a purely legitimate business transaction." Edward Kelly, executive director of the Maritime Association of the Port of New York and New Jersey, also said, "I think this is scare politics. The business community had no problem with this." CNN's Jeanne Meserve contributed to this report. http://cnn.worldnews.printthis.clickability.comlptlcpt?action=cpt&title=CNN.com+-+Bush... 2/23/2006 CNN.com - Bush: No need to worry about port security - Feb 23. 2006 0 0 Find this article at: http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/02/23/port,secudty/index.htmi ❑ Check the box to include the list of links referenced in the article. Page 3 of 3 http://cnn.worldnews. printthis.clickabil ity.comlptlept?action=cpt&title=CNN. com+-+Bush... 2/23/2006 FOXNews.com - Bush: Ports Deal Nothing to Worry 0 IJ Page 1 of 5 About Bush: Ports Deal Nothing to Worry About Thursday, February 23, 2006 POK NEWS WASHINGTON - President Bush on Thursday said Americans shouldn't fret over the controversial ports deal involving a United Arab Emirates-owned company that has taken Washington and state lawmakers by storm. "People don't need to worry about security," Bush said after meeting with his Cabinet about a White House report issued Thursday regarding the national response to Hurricane Katrina. "We wouldn't go forward if we were concerned about the security of the United States of America," the president added. The president's comments come on the heels of a firestorm of criticism over a deal that would allow the UAE-owned Dubai Ports World to take over operations at six U.S. ports. The deal has lawmakers from both sides of the aisle screaming for a more thorough review of the deal and arguing that the deal with threaten port security in the United States that already is lacking. Bush has vowed to veto any bill aimed at halting the commercial transaction. "The more people learn about the transaction that has been scrutinized and improved by my government, the more they'll be comforted that our ports will be secure." Bush said, adding that port security will still be run by U.S. Customs and the Coast Guard. "The UAE has been a valuable partner in fighting the War on Terror. A lot of goods are shipped from ports to the United States managed by this company." Noting that British companies already manage the ports in question, Bush added: "I also want to remind folks that it's really important we not send mixed messages to friends and allies around the world as we combine, put together, a coalition to fight this War on Terror. So we'll continue to talk to people in Congress and explain clearly why the decision was made." Speaking to FOX News Radio, Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove called Dubai a "great military asset" and "vital to our security." Rove said as far as Dubai's cooperating with Customs and Border Protection and the Container Security Initiative, the UAE is one of the "best and eager partners in safety." Rove said that briefings were going on with both Republican and Democratic staffers to inform them on the deal. Meanwhile, the Senate Armed Services Committee on Thursday was holding a hearing on the deal as lawmakers questioned why the administration didn't give a more thorough scrutiny to the deal. They're calling for more time to probe the transaction before it goes through. Sen. John Warner, R-Va., and chairman of the committee, emphasized UAE's cooperation in the War on Terror, and echoed the Department of Homeland Security's notation that DP World provides support for U.S. Navy ships that dock in Jebel Ali and Fujairah, both in the UAE and managed by DP World, and for the U,S. Air Force at Al Dhafra Air Base in the UAE Warner said the UAE is a "valuable ally" and he has seen nothing to indicate the administration didn't do a "careful and thorough job." That was a claim reinforced by Deputy Treasury Secretary Robert Kimmitt at the briefing. 'We're not aware of a single national security concern raised recently that was not part of the multiagency, three- month review of the deal, Kimmitt. http://www.foxnews.comJprinter_friendly_story/0.3566,185799,00.html 2/23/2006 FOXNews.com - Bush: Ports Deal Nothing to Worry • About 1] Page 2 of 5 Added Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon England: "This review definitely was not cursory and it definitely was not casual. Rather, it was in-depth and comprehensive." But opponents of the plan were not appeased. Committee Ranking Member Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., repeated charges raised in the Sept. 11 commission report that the UAE backed the Taliban and allowed financial support for Al Qaeda. "America's port security is too critical to be subjected to this kind of casual approach," said Sen. Carl Levin, adding the administration has taken a too lax approach to this in dealing with a country with "an uneven record with combating terrorism." He asked how many members of the briefing had discussed the deal with the Sept. 11 commission. None raised a hand. "The events of 9/11 demonstrate America is entitled to total confidence that a country allowed to acquire assets key to our security is as committed as we are to combating terrorism," added the Michigan Democrat. Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y., has co-sponsored legislation with Sen. Robert Menendez, D-N.J., to deny foreign governments permission to run port operations. At the briefing, she called the approval process "a failure of judgment" because officials "did not alert the president, the secretary of the treasury and the secretary of defense" that several of our critical ports would be turned over to foreign country. She and Levin also argued that the statute that defines the job of the panel that reviews the acquisition requires a 45-day review. Warner said he would ask Attorney General Alberto Gonzales for an official interpretation of the statute. England echoed Bush's comments about how in order to be successful and united in the global War on Terror, the United States cannot discriminate when it comes to who it partners with. "In this war, this very long war, it is very important we strengthen the bonds of friendship and security with our friends and allies around the world, particularly in the Arab world," England said, adding that it's the terrorists' goal to help sever U.S. ties with other countries and to create more friction. "My view is, we can't allow this to happen, it has to be the opposite," he said. Whereas White House spokesman Scott McClellan said this week that Bush didn't know about the deal until a few days ago - after it was completed. But Rove said Thursday that Bush did in fact know about it "before the preff kerfuffle." Docs Show Some Routine Requirements Left Out A new government agency created in October reviewed the DP World deal, a senior administration official told FOX News, but documents surfaced late Wednesday that showed approval of the transaction excluded some routine requirements. Last Monday, the U.S. Committee on Foreign Investments in the United States (CFIUS) signed off on the deal for DP World to purchase the London-based Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Co., which operates terminals in the major U.S. ports of Baltimore, Miami, New Jersey, New Orleans, New York and Philadelphia. The deal required the UAE-owned DP World to cooperate with future U.S. investigations, according to documents obtained by The Associated Press. To win permission of the $6.8 billion purchase, DP World had to agree to reveal records on demand about "foreign operational direction" of its business at U.S. ports. Those records broadly include details about the design, maintenance or operation of ports and equipment. The government asked DP World to operate American seaports with existing U.S. managers "to the extent possible." However, the papers show CFIUS did not require DP World to keep copies of business records on U.S. soil, where they would be subject to orders by American courts. http://www. foxnews.com/printer_friend ly_story/0,3 566.185 799.00.htrnl 2/23/2006 FOXNews.com - Bush: Ports Deal Nothing to • Worry About ll Page 3 of 5 "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 Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee and a leading critic of the sale. A senior U.S. official said the Bush administration considers shipping manifests less sensitive. Another detail revealed in the documents shows the administration required DP World to designate an executive to handle requests from the U.S. government, but it did not specify citizenship of that individual. Several of the company's top executives are Americans while others are Arab, Dutch and Indian. Administration: We Won't Outsource Security Administration officials say the company has made available sensitive trade secrets, documents and other concessions as part of the deal. DP World promised to take "all reasonable steps" to assist the Department of Homeland Security in any security questions that arose, and pledged to continue participating in security programs to stop smuggling and detect illegal shipments of nuclear materials. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, on her way from Riyadh to Beirut Thursday, said while scrutiny has increased over who America deals with since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, the system is not set up to prevent a country in the Middle East from doing business with the United States. Rice repeated that the deal was thoroughly vetted and the UAE is a strong ally in the War on Terror. Frances Fragos Townsend, assistant to the president for homeland security, told FOX News that not one federal agency raised an objection to the deal when it was going through the review process, therefore, it is not unusual for the president to not know about such deals until it was complete. "Rarely do these wind up on the president's desk and that's only after there has been an investigation and there is some disagreement," Townsend said. "This didn't get there because none of the agencies who reviewed it had any objection and any security concerns the Department of Homeland Security addressed in a security agreement with DP world. She stressed that the United States is not outsourcing port security, only some port operations. "Port security will continue to be in the very capable hands of the Coast Guard, and Customs and Border Patrol," Townsend said. "This is really a commercial deal. There are commercial deals in U.S. ports around the country with other companies, other foreign companies and we address those commercial concems and the security arrangements because we continue to control security. Security arrangements in U.S. ports won't change regardless of whether this deal goes through or not." DHS issued a release of port security activities it conducts independently of terminal operators that noted that funding for port security has increased by more than 700 percent since September 11, 2001, from $259 million in 2001 to about $1.6 billion in fiscal year 2005. But Congress is still fuming about the still-emerging details of the deal. "Current law dealing with approval of foreign investment needs to be revised. Right now, it's a 12-member committee headed by the Treasury secretary," said Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, chairwoman of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, adding, "Congress is really cut out of the loop." Others contend that the review process at the administration level was incomplete, especially because the panel did not use the entire 45 days allotted to review the sale. "Outsourcing the ownership of this critical homeland security priority to Dubai Ports World without a thorough review makes no sense at alt," added Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash. http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,185799.00.html 2/23/2006 FOXNews.com - Bush: Ports Deal Nothing to Worry About • Page 4 of 5 • On Thursday, Rep. Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., the ranking Democrat on the House Homeland Security Committee, wrote to the Government Accountability Office asking it to look into the decision-making process of CFIUS, which Thompson claimed suffered from conflicts of interest and a lax view of what a national security threat is. "The GAO found that the Department of Treasury, which chairs CFUIS, has a limited view of the definition of a national security threat. For example, sales that threaten critical infrastructure protection, including port security, may not be considered a national security threat. In the Department of Treasury's view, a national security threat does not exist unless threatening intelligence is reported about the parties involved or an acquisition affects export-control technologies or classified contracts," Thompson wrote to GAO Comptroller General David Walker. The vice chairman pointed to the prior relationship between Treasury Secretary John Snow and DP World, which bought port operations previously owned by CSX Corporatin, of which Snow used to be CEO. "I would like the GAO's investigation to answer the following questions 1) Did the Secretary of Treasury recuse himself from the review of this sale? If not, what role did he have in the review?" Thompson wrote. The deal also stinks to several lawmakers who say the UAE's past linkages to the Sept. 11, 2001, hijackers and other international relationships are suspect. Critics argue the UAE was an important transfer point for shipments of smuggled nuclear components sent to Iran, North Korea and Libya by a Pakistani scientist. The UAE also refuses to recognize Israel and considers the Taliban the rightful government in Afghanistan. "The wisdom of the American people should be taken into account here.... It is not as I have seen reported in some corners some form of Islamophobia. That entire description would indicate some sort of irrational fear," said Rep. J.D. Hayworth, R-Ariz. "The bottom line is this: When in doubt, cut it out," Hayworth said. "in regards to selling American ports to the United Arab Emirates, not just NO, but HELL NO!" Rep Sue Myrick, R- N.C., wrote to Bush in a letter posted on her Web site. 'The UAE Is a Very Solid Friend' Officials counter that the U.S.-UAE alliance goes far deeper than this port deal as part of ongoing reforms in the intelligence services. DHS argued that the UAE gives U.S. and coalition forces "unprecedented access" to its ports and territory, overflight clearances and other logistical assistance. DHS also submitted that the UAE has frozen accounts of suspected groups linked to terrorists and has enacted aggressive anti-money laundering and counter-terrorist financing laws. The country allows Customs and Border Protection agents in its ports in Dubai, where they inspect cargo departing for the United States. Former Central Command chief Tommy Franks told FOX News that not only is the UAE a great ally in the War on Terror, but more American Navy ships are in Dubai's port than any other in the world. He also said the port is run in excellent fashion. Sen_ Joseph Biden, D-Del., agreed that the U.S.-UAE relationship is a decent one but added, "They have been an ally but just as the Colombian government has been an ally with us in terms of fighting narcotics. We wouldn't put the Colombian government in charge of a border control spot. They are an ally, they should be treated fairly. [But] it looks like commerce has been put in front of security." He added: "if the president pushes this, the Congress will stop it." Many lawmakers say they have enough support to override a presidential veto, which Bush has promised if a bill passes trying to halt the deal. http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,185799.00.html 2/23/2006 FOXNews.com - Bush: Ports Deal Nothing to Worry About 0 Page 5 of 5 DP World is the seventh largest terminal operator in the world, operating 23 facilities in 13 countries. It has terminal contracts in countries that are allies of the United States, including Germany, Australia, India and South Korea as well as nations such as China, Saudi Arabia and Venezuela. If it does win U.S. approval for the deal, the company will own the contracts for terminals now run in the United States by P&O. Outside of cruise ship terminals in those ports, operations include two of the 14 terminals in Baltimore's port, one of three terminals in the Miami port, one of five terminals in Newark, two of five terminals in New Orleans, one of five terminals in Philadelphia. DHS officials also note that the deal lets DP World run four of 12 terminals in Houston and allows it to be involved in stevedoring for all five terminals in Norfolk, though DP World would not manage any specific terminal. The company's retiring chief operating officer, American Edward H. Bilkey, said the company will do whatever the Bush administration asks to enhance shipping security and ensure the sale goes through. Bilkey said Wednesday he will work in Washington to persuade skeptical lawmakers they should endorse the deal; Senate oversight hearings already are scheduled. "We're disappointed," Bilkey told the AP in an interview. "We're going to do our best to persuade them that they jumped the gun. The UAE is a very solid friend, as President Bush has said." FOX News' Cari Cameron and The Associated Press contributed to this report. SEARCH GO Click here for FOX News RSS Feeds Advertise on FOX News Channel, FOXNews.corn and FOX News Radio Jobs at FOX News Channel. Internships at FOX News Channel (Summer Internship deadline is March 31, 2006). Terms of use. Privacy Statement. For FOXNews.com comments write to foxnewsonline@foxnews.com; For FOX News Channel comments write to comments@foxnews.com ® Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. Copyright 2006 FOX News Network, LLC. All rights reserved. All market data delayed 20 minutes. http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,185799,00.html 2/23/2006 USATODAY.com 0 Page I of 3 CSI PRINTTHIS Page 1 A Powered by nj aldcahility 0 Security issues go beyond ports flap Analysts see bigger threats By Mimi Hall, Bill Nichols and Sue Kirchhoff USA TODAY When mayors, governors and members of Congress leamed this week that an Arab company was poised to oversee some terminals at six major U.S. seaports, many reacted with surprise and horror. They demanded to know why President Bush would support the idea of a government-owned company from the United Arab Emirates (UAE) operating key commercial areas in this country where security is paramount. And they vowed to stop the deal. The $6.8 billion ports deal has become an extraordinary piece of political theater in Washington, but it is quite ordinary in another sense. It merely is the latest example of a decades-long trend in which foreign interests have become heavily involved in U.S. institutions the government now considers targets for terrorism - from busy seaports to utilities and railways. At the massive Port of Los Angeles alone, 80% of the terminals are run by foreign firms. And the U.S. Department of Transportation says the United Kingdom, Denmark, Hong Kong, Japan, South Korea, Singapore, China and Taiwan have interests in U.S. port terminals. Bush says a company from the UAE, a U.S. ally in the war on terrorism, shouldn't be treated any differently than other companies that seek to do business here. But the tiny Persian Gulf nation was a base of operations for two 9/11 hijackers - a fact cited repeatedly Wednesday by Democratic and Republican politicians from New York to Miami. However, port security specialists say much of Wednesday's rhetoric focused on the wrong questions. Allowing Dubai Ports World to control up to 30% of the port terminals in New York, New Jersey, Baltimore, Philadelphia, New Orleans and Miami shouldn't really be a cause for concern, says James Loy, former deputy secretary for the Department of Homeland Security and a retired commandant of the Coast Guard. "We're making a mountain out of a mole hill here." He and other analysts say that instead, politicians should focus on gaps in port-security programs that have left the global shipping system and the nation's 360 ports vulnerable to terrorism. The vulnerabilities extend from companies that load cargo containers abroad and the inspection process at overseas ports, to the need to install radiation detectors at most U.S. ports. If the Dubai Ports World deal is sealed, the company would oversee only a tiny piece of a security chain that is weak from start to finish, Loy says. At the six ports, the company would be responsible only for keeping cargo containers secure from the time they are unloaded from foreign ships to when the containers are taken away on trucks, generally a few hours later. The more significant vulnerabilities are abroad, where blue jeans, car parts and other goods are loaded at foreign companies before making the journey to U.S. ports. http://usatoday. printthis.clickabihty.comlptlcpt?action=cpt&title=USATODAY.com&expi... 2/23/2006 USATODAY.com Page 2 of 3 • 0 U.S. Customs and Border Protection agents inspect U.S.-bound goods at 42 of the world's busiest foreign ports. However, the Homeland Security Department acknowledges that by the time a pair of jeans ends up in someone's shopping cart in Ohio, the chance that the container in which they were shipped was inspected by a U.S. agent is less than 10%. That security gap is part of what fueled this week's firestorm. New Jersey Gov. Jon Corzine, a Democrat, says his state will file suit later this week to stop the deal in which Dubai is taking over the port terminals from a London company. Members of Congress, including Senate Armed Services Chairman John Warner, R-Va., say they are planning hearings. Loy says he hopes politicians will begin to focus on the significant port-security questions that are "much more deserving of our interest and attention than this little episode." Key among them: Is the U.S. government doing enough to make sure terrorists abroad don't use cargo containers to sneak weapons of mass destruction past the Coast Guard and Customs officers responsible for security? As a terminal operator, Dubai Ports World would be responsible only for terminal maintenance and security in the area where cargo containers are stored before being loaded onto trucks. Before that happens, some containers are inspected by the Coast Guard. Shipping company and port employees who handle cargo are checked against terrorist watch lists. "I can understand the high level of anxiety the deal has created," says Keith Mason, former chairman of the Georgia Port Authority. "But a more important issue is what's contained in the boxes when they get to the United States." After 9/11, the U.S. government imposed security requirements and programs at U.S. ports in response to heightened concerns that terrorists could try to smuggle weapons of mass destruction into the USA in cargo containers. However, the checks are spotty, and once containers arrive in the United States, they seldom are inspected. The government is working to install drive-through radiation detectors at all major ports so that trucks carrying offloaded containers can be checked for radiation on their way to the nation's highways, but that program is just beginning. Now, only 37% of the cargo coming into the USA is sent through radiation detectors. Other government screening programs include: -The Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism, which offers benefits to companies, ports, terminal operators and others that provide verifiable information about their cargo and operations. The program was designed to allow Homeland Security to focus on high-risk cargo from undisclosed countries the government suspects of having ties to terrorism. But last year, congressional investigators found that of the 4,357 importers certified under the program, only 564 or 13% - had been deemed secure by Customs officials. -A 24-hour advance manifest rule requires most sea carriers to give the U.S. government descriptions of cargo and information on those handling the cargo 24 hours before it is loaded. -The Container Security Initiative, which is a voluntary program that allows U.S. officials to pre-screen companies and their goods before containers are loaded on ships. Through the program, U.S. agents work at overseas ports using sophisticated computer models to identify potentially risky cargo that should be physically inspected. Besides raising security concerns, the debate over the Dubai deal has cast a spotlight on the increasingly prevalent foreign ownership of U.S. ports. Stephen Flynn of the Council on Foreign Relations estimates that most port terminals across the nation are run by foreign interests. In Los Angeles, port spokeswoman Theresa Adams Lopez says, foreign operations include Yusen Terminals Inc., http://usatoday.printthis.clickability.com/pt/cpt?action=cpt&tile=USATODAY.com&expi... 2/23/2006 USATODAY.com 1* 0 a subsidiary of Japanese shipping giant NYK Line, established in 1885. Page 3 of 3 The Port of Seattle has five container terminals. Three are run by U.S. companies, one is managed by a South Korean company, and the fifth is managed by a company partly owned by the Singapore government. The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey owns five primary cargo terminals, three of which are run by foreign firms. The terminal that would be run by the Dubai-based company is operated in conjunction with a Danish firm. The terminal is leased to the two companies and is five years into the 30-year lease, port authority spokesman Steve Coleman says. The other two main cargo terminals in New York and New Jersey are run by the same Danish firm and by a Hong Kong-based company. Loy says it's all an inevitable part of a global economy. "The notion that we should not have our ports operated by foreign companies is ludicrous, and indicates someone is not understanding how the global marketplace works today," he says. Meanwhile, U.S. exporters have worried about possible trade retaliation if the UAE deal is blocked. U.S. shipping companies also have concerns. Bob Waters, vice president of SSA Marine, the largest U.S.-owned marine terminal operator, said his company has not seen any signs of retaliation at its sites abroad. The Seattle-based company has operations in 150 ports worldwide. "We haven't seen any indication of that yet," Waters says. But "is there a concern? Sure." • REPRINT.' & PEFM15_: _ N Find this article at: http://www.usatoday.com/pdntedibon/news/2006022311 a_cover23_dom.art.htm ❑ Check the box to include the list of links referenced in the article. J http://usatoday.printthis.clickability.comlptlcpt?action=cpt&title=USATODAY.com&expi... 2/23/2006