The Dirty Little Secret behind the UAE Port Security Scandal
By David Sirota
Working for Change
Wednesday 22 February 2006
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/022306B.shtml
http://www.workingforchange.com/blog/index.cfm?mode=entry&entry=8F0C2C26-E5A6-B306-55BE87948B44A59C
Politicians and the media are loudly decrying the Bush
administration's proposal to turn over port security to a firm
owned by the United Arab Emirates (UAE) - a country with ties to
terrorists. They are talking tough about national security - but
almost no one is talking about what may have fueled the
administration's decision to push forward with this deal: the
desire to move forward Big Money's "free" trade agenda.
How much does "free" trade have to do with this? How about a
lot. The Bush administration is in the middle of a two-year push
to ink a corporate-backed "free" trade accord with the UAE. At
the end of 2004, in fact, it was Bush Trade Representative
Robert Zoellick who proudly boasted of his trip to the UAE to
begin negotiating the trade accord. Rejecting this port security
deal might have set back that trade pact. Accepting the port
security deal - regardless of the security consequences - likely
greases the wheels for the pact. That's probably why instead of
backing off the deal, President Bush - supposedly Mr. Tough on
National Secuirty - took the extraordinary step of threatening
to use the first veto of his entire presidency to protect the
UAE's interests. Because he knows protecting those interetsts -
regardless of the security implications for America - is
integral to the "free" trade agenda all of his corporate
supporters are demanding.
The Inter Press Service highlights exactly what's at stake,
quoting a conservative activists who admits that this is all
about trade:
"The United States' trade relationship with the UAE is the third
largest in the Middle East, after Israel and Saudi Arabia. The
two nations are engaged in bilateral free talks that would
liberalise trade between the two countries and would, in theory
at least, allow companies to own and operate businesses in both
nations. 'There are legitimate security questions to be asked
but it would be a mistake and really an insult to one of our
leading trading partners in that region to reject this
commercial transaction out of hand,' said Daniel T. Griswold,
who directs the Center for Trade Policy Studies at the Cato
Institute, a Washington-based libertarian think tank."
Look, we've seen this before. Just last year, Congress approved
a US taxpayer-funded loan by the Bush administration to a
British company to help build nuclear technology in Communist
China. Despite major security concerns raised - and a
legislative effort to block the loan - Congress's "free traders"
(many of whom talk so tough on security) made sure the loan went
through so as to preserve the US-China free trade relationship
that is allowing lawmakers' corporate campaign contributors
export so many US jobs.
There is no better proof that our government takes its orders
from corporate interests than these kinds of moves. That's what
this UAE deal is all about - the mixture of the right-wing's
goal of privatizing all government services (even post 9/11 port
security!) with the political Establishment's desire to make
sure Tom-Friedman-style "free" trade orthodoxy supersedes
everything. This is where the culture of corruption meets
national security policy - and, more specifically, where the
unbridled corruption of on-the-take politicians are weakening
America's security.
The fact that no politicians and almost no media wants to even
explore this simple fact is telling. Here we have a major US
security scandal with the same country we are simultaneously
negotiating a free trade pact with, and no one in Washington is
saying a thing. The silence tells you all you need to know about
a political/media establishment that is so totally owned by Big
Money interests they won't even talk about what's potentially at
the heart of a burgeoning national security scandal.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I am only one, but I am one. I cannot do everything, but I
can do something. And because I cannot do everything, I will
not refuse to do the something that I can do. What I can do,
I should do. And what I should do, by the grace of God,
I will do." - Edward Everett Hale
==========================================
Subject: Dubai Port Deal, Dick Cheney Shooting, Iran, Straits Of
Hormuz
* Listen to the MP3 Audio - Segment 1 (8.83 MB)
http://www.charlesgoyette.com/archive/media/2006-02-23-Charles-01.mp3
* Listen to the MP3 Audio - Segment 2 (9.32 MB)
http://www.charlesgoyette.com/archive/media/2006-02-23-Charles-02.mp3
* Listen to the MP3 Audio - Segment 3 (9.11 MB)
http://www.charlesgoyette.com/archive/media/2006-02-23-Charles-03.mp3
========================================================
"All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good
conscience to remain silent"
-- Thomas Jefferson -
http://www.apfn.net/pogo.htm
__________________________________________________