Matthew Zimmerman

Most of the time, I disagree with the Bush administration. They usually make decisions that baffle and anger and frustrate me. But, as hard as it is to admit it, I must come to their defense about this deal to give an United Arab Emirates company control over some port operations at several U.S. ports.

Politicians of both parties, many of whom coincidentally will be running for President in 2008, have crawled out of the woodwork to criticize this deal. Rep. Sue Myrick (R, NC) had the least literate response (PDF) to the deal:

In regards to selling American ports to the United Arab Emirates, not just NO-- but HELL NO!

But her letter does reflect the basic idea that most of the other slightly more eloquent critics of the plan have expressed. They've sensed what they think is a rare opportunity to portray Bush as weak on terrorism. Bush, for his part, has stuck with the deal and with the Adminstration organization that authorized it, and (so.. painful.. to write this...) I think he is right to do so.

First, as the administration has stated many times, the UAE company won't be in charge of port security. See, we have these people called the U.S. Coast Guard, whom I'm pretty sure is an American organization. Secondly, this UAE company would not be the first foreign company in some capacity in American ports. NPR had a story yesterday about one of the ports, located in New Jersey, that would be affected by the deal. They reported that several foreign companies ran various operations at the port, including one from Denmark and two from China.

In other words, the UAE company wouldn't be the first foreign company at the port, but it would be the first foreign company with "Arab" in its name. I'm trying to come up with another word to describe all the criticism, but the only one I can think of is this: racist.