Is at the heart of the domestic opposition to the
But let's be clear: the opposition to the acquisition by Dubai Ports World is completely bogus.
The deal would have no significant effect on port security. ... Nor would the deal radically alter the workplace. ... Nor would the deal be particularly new in the world of global shipping. ...
a bastion of Taliban radicalism. All Arabs may look alike to certain blowhard senators, but the Dubai is a modernizing, globalizing place. It was the first country in the region to sign the U.S. Container Security Initiative. It's signed agreements to bar the passage of nuclear material and to suppress terror financing. U.A.E. ports service United Arab Emirates military ships, and U.A.E. firms have made major investments in Chrysler and Time Warner, somehow without turning them into fundamentalist bastions. U.S.
In short, there is no evidence this deal will do any harm. But it is certain that the xenophobic hysteria will come back to harm the
U.S. The oil-rich nations of the Middle Easthave plenty of places to invest their money and don't need to do favors for nations that kick them in the teeth. Moreover, this is a region in the midst of traumatic democratic change. The strongest argument the fundamentalists have is that they are engaged in a holy war against the racist West, which imposes one set of harsh rules on Arabs and another set of rules on everybody else. Now comes a group of politicians to prove them gloriously right.
God must love Hamas and Moktada al-Sadr. He has given them the America First brigades of Capitol Hill.
Brooks imparts the worst motives to the opposition. I wouldn't go so far, but it's hard to disagree with his general point: that the ports deal is opposed because the buyer is an Arab nation. Beyond that, there's no intelligible, rational standard being offered against the deal.
Share this Article
Like this Article
Print this ArticlePrint Article