Some of History's Lessons Never Learned

Port Deal's Political Fallout Not Over
House GOP Drafting Bill to Require Hill Oversight of Foreign Acquisitions

By Jonathan Weisman
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, March 11, 2006; Page A03

House Republican leaders will unveil legislation as soon as next week demanding a congressional role in reviewing the acquisition of U.S. businesses by foreign buyers, suggesting that the controversy over a now-abandoned Dubai port deal will continue to roil congressional relations with the Bush administration.

House Majority Whip Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) is drafting a bill to require congressional oversight as the administration reviews such foreign acquisitions, a role Congress has not played since the Committee on Foreign Investments in the United States (CFIUS) was created three decades ago.

A day after United Arab Emirates-based Dubai Ports World abandoned its bid to control terminal operations at six major U.S. seaports, lawmakers and President Bush made it clear that the issue was not going away. In remarks to newspaper editors, Bush said he is "concerned about a broader message this issue could send to our friends and allies around the world, particularly in the Middle East."

"In order to win the war on terror, we have got to strengthen our relationships and friendships with moderate Arab countries in the Middle East," Bush said. "UAE is a committed ally in the war on terror. They are a key partner for our military in a critical region."

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, speaking to reporters while flying to Chile, said: "Of course I think you have to be concerned about the perception and the message that this might send. It means that we are going to have to work and double our efforts to send a strong message that we value our allies, our moderate allies, in the Middle East."

U.S. Trade Representative Rob Portman announced that trade talks between the United States and the UAE, set to begin Monday, will be postponed. Spokeswoman Neena Moorjani said both sides need more time to prepare.

Flush from what they see as a victory, members of Congress appear determined to insert themselves into matters of national security that they had previously left exclusively to the president. But their aggressive response has left administration officials -- and even some colleagues -- concerned that the longer the controversy drags out, the more likely it will alienate foreign allies, dampen investment in the United States and even slow the economy.

On Capitol Hill, lawmakers from both parties pledged to revise the review process for business acquisitions by foreigners while moving swiftly on legislation to bolster port security.

Critics of the congressional attack on the port deal said DP World's withdrawal will not make the six U.S. ports any safer from terrorist attacks. But lawmakers say the controversy will spark action on measures to tighten security that have languished in Congress. Both the Senate and House homeland security committees said they will draft legislation in a matter of weeks.

House leaders have decided to push ahead next week with a full House vote on legislation to kill the port deal. The House Appropriations Committee had approved the measure 62 to 2 on Wednesday, but rank-and-file members outside the committee have asked to go on record with their opposition.

Democrats demanded that the White House release all documents related to DP World's acquisition of London-based Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Co., including the administration's review of the deal and documents pertaining to a Coast Guard memo that said investigators could not say whether the transaction would heighten terrorist threats.

Despite the assurances of congressional Republicans and the president, some Democrats also questioned whether DP World really committed to shedding its U.S. port assets Thursday when it pledged to "transfer" them to a U.S. entity. Bush himself said the Dubai-owned firm has "made the difficult decision to hand over port operations that they had purchased from another company."

"The hits just keep on coming." It just amazes me how narrowly our Congress looks (or doesn't look) at our history. America has been down this isolationist route once before. The result of that narrow view, a view apparently advocated by both Democrats and some Republicans, was a minor dust-up we euphemistically have labeled World War II. Just a minor hiccup in our nation's and our world's history. Certainly that minor conflagration is not worthy of recall. I mean, really! Just because tens of millions of people were killed and maimed is no reason for us to worry about a repetition.

How is it possible that less than a hundred years after the near destruction of the entire world he fail to remember the lesson that war taught us? We cannot afford to live in this nation with our heads in the sand (or some anatomical location). When Americans directs our attention inward, we run the risk of losing our impact on the world stage. If we withdraw from the world stage, we run the risk of finding ourselves trapped in a difficult political situation in which our options have been severely limited by those beyond our control. For those of you with a somewhat shorter attention span, I give you 9-11. Had the Clinton Administration been more actively involved in conducting affairs in the Middle East than in conducting affairs in the Oval Office Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda might have been stopped before they were able to strike.

Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.
George Santayana (1863 - 1952), The Life of Reason, Volume 1, 1905

In denying this port deal and in restricting foreign investment as this Congress proposes to do, we are headed back down that same path.

Full Story: The New American Isolationism

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below