U.A.E. Threatens Retaliation

The United Arab Emirates is furious over the killing of the buy out of Penninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation and is threatening retaliation. Not militarily, but economically by refusing the docking of any and all ships American ships including U.S. naval vessels as well as against lucrative deals for Boeing.

The Emirates Group airline will decide later this year whether it will buy Boeing’s new 787 Dreamliner or its competitor, Airbus A350. The airline last fall placed an order worth $9.7 billion for 42 Boeing 777 aircraft, making Dubai Boeing’s largest 777 customer.

Oh well, now that the ports are safe. Oh wait…never mind.

The family-ruled sheikhdom may buy as many as 50 wide-body aircraft from Boeing and Airbus during the next four years, according to Aerospace Enterprise officials.

The UAE military also bought Boeing’s Apache helicopters. Meanwhile, Boeing has been in talks with the emirates to try to sell its AWACS planes.

Well killing these deals only makes sense, after all we don’t want to arm a rogue terrorist nation right? And who knows maybe the U.A.E. will decide to move forward less vigorously now on reforms to reduce money laundering as well.

And we had better get on our representatives and senators to kill this too,

Several businesses have expressed concern that the controversy over the $6.8 billion ports deal could damage trade with the UAE. Dubai is one of the seven emirates. The United States and the UAE are meeting next week for a fourth round of talks to sign a free-trade agreement.

Free trade with a terrorist nation?!?! What are those idiots in Chimpy’s Administration thinking?

But when it comes to the emirates’ cooperation in the war on terrorism and in intelligence gathering, there is concern that some help may be pulled.

“If we reject the company in terms of doing the [ports] work, they are going to lose a lot of face. In the Arab culture, losing face is a big deal,” a former government official said. “We risk losing that help. It is not an empty threat.”

Yeah, but they’re terrorist anyway, so who cares, right?

FILED UNDER: Middle East, National Security, Terrorism, US Politics, World Politics,
Steve Verdon
About Steve Verdon
Steve has a B.A. in Economics from the University of California, Los Angeles and attended graduate school at The George Washington University, leaving school shortly before staring work on his dissertation when his first child was born. He works in the energy industry and prior to that worked at the Bureau of Labor Statistics in the Division of Price Index and Number Research. He joined the staff at OTB in November 2004.

Comments

  1. floyd says:

    do what’s right without considering the cost. just be sure you know what’s right! a tall order in today’s america[lol]

  2. TBIRD1107 says:

    I wouldn’t blame them a bit. We’ve let politics determine foreign policy. One of the few ME countries we have a decent relationship with and we stereotype them as possible terrorist supporters.

  3. RiverRat says:

    This is an extremely sad day for the America I love. This is a strategic defeat, possibly a fatal one in the Long War, Ver. 2.0. It reminds me of Soviet Lend/Lease which was the right decision. This decision is wrong and may be paid for in blood and treasure for decades to come.

    Saudi Arabia and Dubai have operated marine and air terminals in the US for years. I have a hard time blaming Bush for the â??tone deafnessâ?? of 3rd tier bureaucrats who obviously, given 15 to 20 years of similar deals, did not foresee the political firestorm.

    A tactical win-win for xenophobes and the Libs; a potentially catastrophic strategic loss for America and the West.

  4. Jack Ehrlich says:

    It will be really hard for the Democrats and the MSM to blame this one on Bush. I wonder if the liberals living in Washington State appreciate how much the French will enjoy filling those cancelled 777 orders with Airbuses. We sell them billions of dollars in military equipment but do not trust them to manage ports formerly run by the Brits. Red Chinese are ok though. Whats up with that?

  5. Herb says:

    Once again, the politicians in Washington have bungled everything in their lust for power and glory, not to mention their re election in November. Will the Democrats and Republicrats take and accept responsibility for the damage this will cause this country,? Will they accept the responsibility for the lost jobs in the Aerospace Industry? Will they accept responsibility for the damage to our Intelligence network?

    The answer to all above is not only NO, but Hell NO.

    We now have a Congress that thinks of itself as the All High and the All Mighty and that no one has more knowledge and smarts than they.

    All this while the Polls show that Congress has an all time LOW rating on performance.

  6. Richard Gardner says:

    I am seriously concerned about foreign ownership of important AMERICAN assets. I live in a major port city in WA (43,000 jobs) and was at the port this past Monday. And what did I see? Lots of containers. Oh yes, foreigners everywhere! The single American-flagged ship was doing the mainland to Hawaii short-run. Looking at the terminals, I see they are run or used by by:

    Local Port Authority (US, obviously)
    APM Terminals Pacific (Maersk Sealand) – Danish Corporation – source of the Danish Cartoon controversy. And we know they have a militant Islam problem, that created the cartoon controversy.
    Olympic (Cosco) – Red China
    Hyundai Merchant Marine – Korea. OK,
    Husky (Yang Ming) – Red China
    Washington United Terminals – a US corp, majority owed by Koreans

    And the Port of Seattle, half the terminals are run by foreign countries :
    Handgun (got to love that name) – Korea
    NOL – Singapore (hmm, more moslems)

    If we are worried about nukes, then what about biological weapons, that can be mailed? I call for a ban on all mail from overseas, because we don’t know what dangers lurk!

    And while we’re at it, what are pure blood American companies doing spending hard-earned
    ‘merican money developing markets in other countries?

    Sorry, this reminds me of the controversy when a Japanese firm bought Rockefeller Center, funny in hindsight.

  7. Richard Gardner says:

    Oops, I forgot Cargill, “supplier to the world,” who has their own terminal that they totally run. Though I wouldn’t be suprised if lots of their shares were owned by them foreigners.

  8. slickdpdx says:

    There has got to be a sensible middle ground between the REALPOLITIK of yesteryear, tolerating any old dictatorship, and a realpolitik for now…Where does the UAE fit? It is certainly more moderate than many other states.

  9. DC Loser says:

    Uh, Richard, I believe Cargill is totally privately owned, not publicly traded.

    And while weâ??re at it, what are pure blood American companies doing spending hard-earned
    â??merican money developing markets in other countries?

    I think the concept is called “trade.” Chasing the almighty buck for their shareholders.

  10. RA says:

    This is the biggest step backward in the war on terror since 9-11. The UAE was fully cooperating with us before. Now they will continue to smile politely and take the money our navy gives them. But when thay see something going on behind the scenes they will avert their eyes and privately say “screw the Americans”.

    The worst part of this is this was accomplished by the Democrats who want us to loose the war on terror and some normally sane useful idiot Republicans.

  11. anjin-san says:

    So these are our “allies”? If they don’t get their way, they will get revenge. With friend like that…

  12. anjin-san says:

    Oh yea, and P.S. lets take a look at who actually killed the deal:

    White House Asked Dubai Ports to Pull Out
    March 10, 2006 — – The White House asked Dubai Ports World, a company owned by the United Arab Emirates, to give up its management stake in U.S. ports, to save President Bush from the politically difficult position of vetoing a key piece of legislation to protect America’s ports, ABC News has learned.

    If the deal was so frigging important, why did the WH place politics over national security?

  13. LJD says:

    That’s a big leap of faith in Good Morning America, considering no one else has broken this story, and the quote you provided (link not included) failed to substantiate the claim in any way.

  14. Herb says:

    AS:

    Good to see that you have the “inside” on the WH.

    Now, all you need is the “inside” on yourself, in other words, what makes you so discontented and hateful all the time.