« Ports & Soft Bigotry: A Commentary I Wish I Had Written | On Islamic Law, reproducing a comment of mine »
February 20, 2006
From Comments: A Perfect Illustration of Ports Controversy Driver
From comments on More Mendacious Madness: Lawsuits & Merely Quoting (Updated: Requested comments on AP Article) a perfect illustration of the kind of weak thinking, xenophobic, ignorant nonsense that is driving the Arab-baiting response to DPW's takeover of the UK firm P&O:
As I replied in comments:
Well some ignoramus knee-jerking idiot wrote the following:
Can't help but wonder how you paranoids here, that view American's speaking up about this deal as bigots, would feel if an American Federal Government owned company were to take over the UAE's oil facilities.
Well since none of us writing here are UAE citizens we can not speak for the UAE, however the UAE has a history of welcoming and cooperating with USG entities, and welcoming US investment.
And in the region, no government has objected to the US Gov Corporation, OPIC controlling ownership of firms via equity funds. A reasonable equivalent of the situation, given the US largley lacks internationally operating public firms. I've worked on several OPIC financed acquisitions myself.
The answer, then, based on the substance, is that (i) now in the MENA region - at American Government urging - the governments are opening up to outsourcing the management and privatising in part or whole infrastructure operations, (ii) there is already a track record of MENA governments welcoming, after proper review [and often under pressure from USG], governmental corporation investment, (iii) in the past decade generally welcoming US entities investing in privatisation of public assets.
So, based on the evidence, it would seem that the answer is better than certain know nothing Americans.
[I add this interesting side comment from 'Aqoul: On Morocco, Investment & Islamist Promotion with respect to real Islamists promoting Western investors - a data point.
One should add that certainly there is in the Islamic world a class of knee jerkers and Xenophobes every bit as virulent as those in the US, if not more. However, most of the region has began to accept the US Government's argument that they need to open up to US and other foreign invesment, privatise government assets to boost efficiency, etc.]
Fundamentalist muslims in the UAE might strongly object to a bunch of Christian types taking over their oil. Do ya think?
No, I don't. But then I know something of the region, whereas you're merely blithering on like an ignorant, bigotted fool.
Laying aside the ridiculous, ignorant, knee-jerking smear (fundie Muslims...), in the UAE, Xian expats virtually run many of the major corporations, and Dubai in particular has thrown open the doors to Western firms, like UK's HSBC in banking to take an example, to develop Islamic finance. Why, in DPW, Xian Western Expats run whole divisions. A patriotic Xian American (based on his long military service record) was the head of an entire regional operating division, until he was hired away early this year to work with the Bush Administration.
Can't imagine that scenario would play well in theocracy states of the UAE or most of the ME.
You're an ignorant bigot and an idiot. UAE is a confederation of Emirs. Emirs are 'kings' or 'princes' - a secular title and the UAE is not a theocracy.
But thanks, this comment is a perfect example of the idiocy behind the knee-jerking opposition to DPW.
Posted by The Lounsbury at February 20, 2006 04:28 AM
Filed Under:
MENA Region General
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.aqoul.com/movabletype/mt-tb.cgi/2409
Comments
dear l,
well ... at least we get more visitors now ... should we start posting juicy pictures?
--raf*
Posted by: raf* at February 20, 2006 01:53 PM
Ignorant potshotters are a sign of wider exposure and readership.
Posted by: matthew hogan at February 20, 2006 03:07 PM
L: you're famous! especially among the less-well-informed.
Posted by: drdougfir at February 20, 2006 03:33 PM
Lets not forget that the UAE was also the launching point for two of the 9.11 hijackers. It doesn't matter if you think their government is a technically a secular one or not. They still have elements of Islamic zealotry which influences a lot of their citizens. Lets also remember that the UAE has a terrible human rights record regarding human trafficking and sexual slavery.
Posted by: BasketCase at February 22, 2006 08:23 AM
"Lets not forget that the UAE was also the launching point for two of the 9.11 hijackers."
Did they go into outer space too? Actually Boston and DC was where they launched from and Florida was where the key people were based and banked. Hamburg was where they plotted.
Let's not forget that if it werent for the UAE, the banking patterns of alQaeda people would not be effectively monitored; that allies of the USA in Central Asia have worse human rights records than UAE and lots of Islamic zealotry (as do our allies Afghanistan and Iraq, today).
UAE port operations firms are proven entities. UAE record on cooperation with the US is clear, and even its view of Israel (not that that should be wholly a priority for Americans ) is one of non-rejectionism. With reluctance, but in honor of international agreements, UAE hosted an ISraeli official delegation in 2003.
From Al-AHram:
"Indeed, the arrival of the Israeli delegation to the United Arab Emirates is already regarded as an extremely sensitive and difficult issue for a country well known for its adherence to time- tested Arab values, particularly at a time when the peace process is virtually stalled due to Israel's criminal intransigence under the notorious leadership of Prime Minister Ariel Sharon. Yet despite the fact that the participation of the Israeli delegation is proving a source of displeasure to the governments of the UAE and Dubai, both are grudgingly forced to accept it considering that Israel is a member of the two international organisations and must be treated equal to other members. No host country can stipulate the non- participation of any member nation, no matter how steep the differences between them."
Finally, companies such as this, while having UAE status are essentiall personelled and run by the same folks of the same background as others in the field.
There may be a point on foreign control of port assets that have direct impace on security, but these do not appear to, as security is Homeland S Dept and Coast Guard, and there does not seem to be too much of a fuss about Chinese govt (and at one time military) control fo West Coast port-operations companies.
Posted by: matthew hogan at February 22, 2006 03:29 PM
the UAE has a terrible human rights record regarding human trafficking and sexual slavery.
Well, maybe, but they certainly aren't alone among countries with human trafficking issues. (And what that has to do with protecting the U.S. against terrorism, anyway, I have no idea.)
Posted by: Eva Luna at February 22, 2006 07:39 PM
And as further illustration of the stupidity behind these comments, Basket Case comes along to illustrate:
Lets not forget that the UAE was also the launching point for two of the 9.11 hijackers.
As was London and Hamburg. Your point then is what?
It doesn't matter if you think their government is a technically a secular one or not. They still have elements of Islamic zealotry which influences a lot of their citizens.
Let me translate this: "It doesn't matter if my betters tell me that my opinions are being pulled out of my ass, I will merely hand wave and throw around words like Zeolotry."
Pure fear and fear-mongering.
Lets also remember that the UAE has a terrible human rights record regarding human trafficking and sexual slavery.
And this has what to do with Port Management.
Posted by: collounsbury at February 25, 2006 04:23 AM

RSS



