The Redhunter

For once I also tend to agree with the Washington Post

At stake -- in theory -- is the question of whether we should "outsource major port security to a foreign-based company," in the words of Mr. Graham. But those words, like that of almost all of the others, sound, well, tone-deaf to us. For one, the deal cannot "outsource major port security," because management companies that run ports do not control security. The U.S. Coast Guard controls the physical security of our ports. The U.S. Customs Service controls container security. That doesn't change, no matter who runs the business operations. Nor is it clear why Mr. Graham or anybody else should be worried about "foreign-based" companies managing U.S. ports, since P&O is a British company. And Britain, as events of the last year have illustrated, is no less likely to harbor radical Islamic terrorists than Dubai.

Exactly. But there's more, as the Post continues

Finally, we're wondering if perhaps American politicians are having trouble understanding some of the most basic goals of contemporary U.S. foreign policy. A goal of "democracy promotion" in the Middle East, after all, is to encourage Arab countries to become economically and politically integrated with the rest of the world. What better way to do so than by encouraging Arab companies to invest in the United States? Clearly, Congress doesn't understand that basic principle, since its members prefer instead to spread prejudice and misinformation.

The Washington Times says "Scotch the Port Deal", but I'm not convinced, mainly because they don't offer any reasons.

It's plainly obvious that a government-owned company from a hostile region should not operate American ports, whatever the assurances about security and however limited its involvement in day-to-day operations.

Not it's not "plainly obvious". Further, if we scotch this deal, then who should do it? They don't say. I am soooo tired of criticism without suggestion, from whatever quarter it comes fron.

Jonah's Two Military Guys publish an email that helps put it in perspective.

Also, the Council on Foreign Relations has a useful FAQ on the deal.

Bottom Line

Maybe Dubai Ports World should get the contract and maybe not. I don't know. Maybe in the days to come viable alternatives will be offered. But most of the criticism I've read so far doesn't contain much factual analysis.

And let's tone down the hysteria, and look at this in a more rational manner. This is not the disaster-in-the-making that some people are making it out to be.