The Storm Over The Ports
As I collected headlines from various subscriptions and RSS feeds there were no less than 20 sources reporting on the issue involving DP World, a UAE-owned port management, including the following reports:
The Bush administration was hiring ex-pats serving as executives for DP World;
The Tampa Port Authority voted 6-1 to in favor of the DPW takeover of Tampa port operations
New Jersey is suing to block DPW from taking over Port Newark
The Senate Banking Committee will hold hearings on the DPW takeovers
Former Senator Bob Dole is a hired lobbyist for DPW
Senator John Kerry is seeking all information relating to contact between the Bush administration and DPW
Members of the UAE met with Osama bin laden and thwarted a CIA operation
The White House is offering a "horse already out of the barn" briefing to GOP leadership
A Wall Street Journal Op/Ed on "Port Politics"
An intelligent (albeit WRONG!) commentary criticzing those of us critical of the vetting of DPW
DPW & the Bush Administration had a secret deal for future DPW cooperation with US investigations as a condition of the deal
Bush's open defiance causes bipartisan anger
Tom DeLay chimes in and condemns Bush's strategy on DPW takeovers
Time Magazine article on who is behind the DPW deal
Time Magazine article on how much political currency is involved in the DPW issue
Bush threatens to veto congressional efforts to block or control DPW deal
NY Times analysis of the DPW deal
NY Times article on the work at ports and the DPW deal
NY Times article on the interagency panel that approved the DPW deal
A blog analysis on how the DPW port deal issues and the NSA scandals are a perfect match
There are literally hundreds of blogs producing material on the DPW issue. The MSM have been chiming in now that the word on DPW has gone from a "page 10 under the fold" story to "front page news." MSM entertainers are commenting that we had foreign companies running port operations; that the furor amounts to nothing less than prejudice against Arabs; the Bush administration has properly vetted DPW and we can trust them to run our ports; and that the Coast Guard, DHS and Customs are in charge of all port security.
Well, let us examine each of these pundit points:
1. Foreign companies running port operations:
One commentator argued that the furor over DPW was economically unsound because we need foreign trade in our ports and that international corporations--especially DPW because of its experience--could be trusted. No one I know has any problem with international trade coming and going through our ports. But allowing a foreign corporation to run port operations creates a serious hole in the first layer of a good security plan, regardless of the nationality of the corproation. However, such is especially dangerous when it involves a company wholly owned by an Arab state that has ties to Osama bin Laden; was a base for some of the 9-11 terrorist operations (including money laundering); had to make secret assurances with the Bush administration to get the deal; and has deep ties to the Bush administration through the hiring of some DPW executives to positions within the administration.
Something is rotten in this deal and I think the stink is coming from the West Wing at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
2. Prejudice Against Arabs
America is a place where prejudice flourishes in small minds. We have entire networks of folks who hate Jews, blacks, Catholics, Hispanics, Arabs and others. It is unfortunate that such prejudices exist, but none-the-less a fact of life in the US. Still, as some of my family who are people of color have made clear to me over many years, there is a deeper, more insidious level of prejudice in America that is latent and less tha obvious. That, too, is an unfortunate fact of life in the US. There have been incidents involving American citizens and residents that have unfairly profiled Muslims, Pakistanis, Arabs and other immigrants from the Middle East.
However, the reality is that we have a level of threat that is primarily coming from a small group of people who are Middle Eastern, operate in often unimpeded ways throughout the Middle East (especially in the Gulf States), and the UAE has been used as a means to an end by terrorists. There may be some prejudice involved, but there are also strong indicators and significant intelligence to support opposing the DPW deal.
3. The Bush Administration Has Properly Vetted DPW
If this is the case, why then was a secret provision of the deal worked out before the deal went forward with the Bush administration approval? Why was there a need to secure the apriori guarantee of complete cooperation with US authorities? Since DPW is entirely owned by a foreign government, how could the Bush administration fully investigate the issues? Did the UAE Royal Families open up all of its governmental secrets to US investigators? There is hardly a fool-proof way to fully investigate an international corporation, never mind a foreign government. So this claim is false on a prima facie basis.
4. The Coast Guard, DHS & Customs Are In Charge Of Port Security
A. The Coast Guard is under staffed and overly taxed with patroling the coasts, rivers and larger lakes. The USCG is operating not only in terms of preventing terrorism, but enforcing fishing regulations, naval laws, inspecting ships and small craft, and performing interdiction for smugglers of drugs, illegal immigration and environmental laws. Port operations have largely been left to other agencies. The Coast Guard's role in port security was officially diminished about 10 years ago when the Martime Defense Zone (MARDEZ) system was re-organized and deemed ineffective (circa 1994-1996).
B. Only about 6% of all cargo off-loaded at our ports are inspected, according to the Bush administration's own reports. Our ports have been the source of huge amounts of smuggling and Customs is entirely our of its element in effectively screening the volume of cargo that is exchanged at our ports. Additionallly, there is cargo that is not inspected because it remains onboard ships that are merely visiting ports to pick up cargo or drop off lmited parts of its cargo. Claiming that Customs has any real control over port security is tantamount to saying we can turn lead into gold. It just isn't so.
C. DHS has screwed the pooch on dealing with the aftermath of Katrina and Rita. Certainly FEMA was at the helm of that fiasco, but the ultimate responsibility rests with the chain of command, including Secretary Chertoff and President Bush. The response to the events of 9-11 were more effective than anything that the DHS has done because there were local and regional New York resources in place, the Pentagon had military resources immediately available, and Flight 93 crashed in an open Pennsylvania field. In terms of actual preparedness for any type of national emergency, DHS is entirely unprepared and failed its first real test.
The idea that we have the infrastructure, resources and organization in place to assure port security is a farce and a lie. The day-to-day operations of a port has more to do with security than anything Customs or the Coast Guard does on a regular basis. So the endorsement of any foreign corporation operating our ports--especially DPW given that it is entirely owned by a foreign government with a questionable set of associations--is ludicrous and lacking.
However, the reality is that we cannot fully insulate our ports from security breaches. It is a vulnerability that we must endure. Which is not necessarily a disastrous situation. We need to tighten the security of our ports. We need to do better and layer our security appropriately. We need to make sure that port operations have direct oversight by entities that have more than an economic investment in port operations (after all, big corporations have insurance and contingency plans). But we have to eliminate foreign control of port operations to assure real security is in place. The principle for doing so is as old as our nation... I learned it from the US Customs House in Salem, Massachusetts when I toured it as part of a high school history class in 1974.
The Bush administration was hiring ex-pats serving as executives for DP World;
The Tampa Port Authority voted 6-1 to in favor of the DPW takeover of Tampa port operations
New Jersey is suing to block DPW from taking over Port Newark
The Senate Banking Committee will hold hearings on the DPW takeovers
Former Senator Bob Dole is a hired lobbyist for DPW
Senator John Kerry is seeking all information relating to contact between the Bush administration and DPW
Members of the UAE met with Osama bin laden and thwarted a CIA operation
The White House is offering a "horse already out of the barn" briefing to GOP leadership
A Wall Street Journal Op/Ed on "Port Politics"
An intelligent (albeit WRONG!) commentary criticzing those of us critical of the vetting of DPW
DPW & the Bush Administration had a secret deal for future DPW cooperation with US investigations as a condition of the deal
Bush's open defiance causes bipartisan anger
Tom DeLay chimes in and condemns Bush's strategy on DPW takeovers
Time Magazine article on who is behind the DPW deal
Time Magazine article on how much political currency is involved in the DPW issue
Bush threatens to veto congressional efforts to block or control DPW deal
NY Times analysis of the DPW deal
NY Times article on the work at ports and the DPW deal
NY Times article on the interagency panel that approved the DPW deal
A blog analysis on how the DPW port deal issues and the NSA scandals are a perfect match
There are literally hundreds of blogs producing material on the DPW issue. The MSM have been chiming in now that the word on DPW has gone from a "page 10 under the fold" story to "front page news." MSM entertainers are commenting that we had foreign companies running port operations; that the furor amounts to nothing less than prejudice against Arabs; the Bush administration has properly vetted DPW and we can trust them to run our ports; and that the Coast Guard, DHS and Customs are in charge of all port security.
Well, let us examine each of these pundit points:
1. Foreign companies running port operations:
One commentator argued that the furor over DPW was economically unsound because we need foreign trade in our ports and that international corporations--especially DPW because of its experience--could be trusted. No one I know has any problem with international trade coming and going through our ports. But allowing a foreign corporation to run port operations creates a serious hole in the first layer of a good security plan, regardless of the nationality of the corproation. However, such is especially dangerous when it involves a company wholly owned by an Arab state that has ties to Osama bin Laden; was a base for some of the 9-11 terrorist operations (including money laundering); had to make secret assurances with the Bush administration to get the deal; and has deep ties to the Bush administration through the hiring of some DPW executives to positions within the administration.
Something is rotten in this deal and I think the stink is coming from the West Wing at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
2. Prejudice Against Arabs
America is a place where prejudice flourishes in small minds. We have entire networks of folks who hate Jews, blacks, Catholics, Hispanics, Arabs and others. It is unfortunate that such prejudices exist, but none-the-less a fact of life in the US. Still, as some of my family who are people of color have made clear to me over many years, there is a deeper, more insidious level of prejudice in America that is latent and less tha obvious. That, too, is an unfortunate fact of life in the US. There have been incidents involving American citizens and residents that have unfairly profiled Muslims, Pakistanis, Arabs and other immigrants from the Middle East.
However, the reality is that we have a level of threat that is primarily coming from a small group of people who are Middle Eastern, operate in often unimpeded ways throughout the Middle East (especially in the Gulf States), and the UAE has been used as a means to an end by terrorists. There may be some prejudice involved, but there are also strong indicators and significant intelligence to support opposing the DPW deal.
3. The Bush Administration Has Properly Vetted DPW
If this is the case, why then was a secret provision of the deal worked out before the deal went forward with the Bush administration approval? Why was there a need to secure the apriori guarantee of complete cooperation with US authorities? Since DPW is entirely owned by a foreign government, how could the Bush administration fully investigate the issues? Did the UAE Royal Families open up all of its governmental secrets to US investigators? There is hardly a fool-proof way to fully investigate an international corporation, never mind a foreign government. So this claim is false on a prima facie basis.
4. The Coast Guard, DHS & Customs Are In Charge Of Port Security
A. The Coast Guard is under staffed and overly taxed with patroling the coasts, rivers and larger lakes. The USCG is operating not only in terms of preventing terrorism, but enforcing fishing regulations, naval laws, inspecting ships and small craft, and performing interdiction for smugglers of drugs, illegal immigration and environmental laws. Port operations have largely been left to other agencies. The Coast Guard's role in port security was officially diminished about 10 years ago when the Martime Defense Zone (MARDEZ) system was re-organized and deemed ineffective (circa 1994-1996).
B. Only about 6% of all cargo off-loaded at our ports are inspected, according to the Bush administration's own reports. Our ports have been the source of huge amounts of smuggling and Customs is entirely our of its element in effectively screening the volume of cargo that is exchanged at our ports. Additionallly, there is cargo that is not inspected because it remains onboard ships that are merely visiting ports to pick up cargo or drop off lmited parts of its cargo. Claiming that Customs has any real control over port security is tantamount to saying we can turn lead into gold. It just isn't so.
C. DHS has screwed the pooch on dealing with the aftermath of Katrina and Rita. Certainly FEMA was at the helm of that fiasco, but the ultimate responsibility rests with the chain of command, including Secretary Chertoff and President Bush. The response to the events of 9-11 were more effective than anything that the DHS has done because there were local and regional New York resources in place, the Pentagon had military resources immediately available, and Flight 93 crashed in an open Pennsylvania field. In terms of actual preparedness for any type of national emergency, DHS is entirely unprepared and failed its first real test.
The idea that we have the infrastructure, resources and organization in place to assure port security is a farce and a lie. The day-to-day operations of a port has more to do with security than anything Customs or the Coast Guard does on a regular basis. So the endorsement of any foreign corporation operating our ports--especially DPW given that it is entirely owned by a foreign government with a questionable set of associations--is ludicrous and lacking.
However, the reality is that we cannot fully insulate our ports from security breaches. It is a vulnerability that we must endure. Which is not necessarily a disastrous situation. We need to tighten the security of our ports. We need to do better and layer our security appropriately. We need to make sure that port operations have direct oversight by entities that have more than an economic investment in port operations (after all, big corporations have insurance and contingency plans). But we have to eliminate foreign control of port operations to assure real security is in place. The principle for doing so is as old as our nation... I learned it from the US Customs House in Salem, Massachusetts when I toured it as part of a high school history class in 1974.
posted by Jim Downey at 2:04 AM
1 Comments:
I've never seen a story explode so fast. Last week, when I first posted about it, no one raise an eyebrow because they were so obsessed with Cheney's hunting accident. Now, it's almost the only thing being talked about -- until Iraq came closer to civil war. I have one thread at my blog that I just have to keep adding to because there are so many stories and columns out there.
Post a Comment
<< Home