Welcome to blog.chinoy.com Sign in | Join

Thursday, March 09, 2006 - Posts

Dubai company moving ports ops to US entity - senator, Reuters, now
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The state-owned Arab company, Dubai Ports World, has pledged to transfer operation of U.S. ports it has acquired from P & O to a U.S. entity, Sen. John Warner said on Thursday.

Warner, a Virginia Republican, read to the U.S. Senate from a document he said was a statement by Dubai Ports World's chief operating officer, Edward Bilkey. "DP World has decided to transfer fully the U.S. operation of P & O Ports, North America to a United States entity," Warner read from the document.

Warner's the chairman of the Senate's Armed Services Committee and had been attempting to save the deal.

I'm wondering if this is an harbinger of impending foreign divestment in the US.

Also, the phrasing "a United States entity" coming from a Republican sounds ripe for the Democratic cries of "no-bid!" since the longshot is KBR's minor-player port's managerment company, Devonport Management Limited. (website)

Chuck Schumer, not willing to let the spotlight off his face, said:

Just after Warner's announcement, Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., a chief critic of the deal was cautious.

“This is obviously a promising development, but the devil's in the details,” Schumer said. “Those of us who feel strongly about this issue believe that the U.S. part of the British company should have no connection to the United Arab Emirates or DP World.”

Seems like he continues to be willfully unclear that P&O is a Dubai company and that "contracts" do not make up a "U.S. part."

Dubai company says moving ports ops to U.S. entity, Reuters, update

The statement said the decision "is based on an understanding that DP World will have time to affect the transfer in an orderly fashion and that DP World will not suffer economic loss." It added that the company would work with the U.S. Treasury Department to implement the decision.
Yeah, that's right, orderly fashion, cause further embarassment to the U.S. would've been when DPW sued the government (thanks "appearing to be strong on security" bloc) for income lost.
0 Comments
The politics on the DPW deal (that's gone through, btw) is, in my opinion, short term political "gains" at the expense of actual long-term security. There's only been one voice on the news I've seen recently (and I really haven't seen much news), so I'm digging all the quotes I can search out on Kim Childs, VP of The American Business Group of Abu Dhabi. An expanded 2nd quote's being replayed during BBC World's coverage.

"If the deal is blocked on terms that aren't consistent with a due diligence process, that sends a loud and clear message to our friends that maybe they should rethink investments in the U.S.," said Kim Childs, ABG executive vice president.

"We deeply regret what appears to have been an uninformed rush to judgment by some opponents of the transaction, as well as inflammatory language that some have adopted," she told reporters in the UAE capital Abu Dhabi.[1]

Much of the uproar is coming from "people in Washington who have never been here or worked here," said Kim Childs, executive vice president of the American Business Group of Abu Dhabi, who first came to the United Arab Emirates 11 years ago from Pennsylvania. "Most of us have raised our children here and have our businesses here," she said. Some of the criticism of the emirates has been like "slapping your best friend in the face," she added. [2]

"A delegation will go this month to educate politicians on relations between the UAE and the United States," said Kim Childs, executive vice-president of the Abu Dhabi-based American Business Group.

"The UAE is a reliable and trustworthy partner and one of our closest allies," she said. [3]

1 U.S.-UAE trade at risk from ports deal-business group, Reuters, 03/08/2006
2 U.S. Businesses Are Lining Up Behind Dubai, NYT 03/08/2006
3 US House committee votes to keep Dubai firm from US ports, Middle East Times, 03/09/2006
0 Comments