Hello Silat,
Just got finished speaking with a friend of mine in D.C. about this.
His read is that it isn't an issue of dollars its an issue of approach to the war. Rice, Rumsfeld, Bush and the State Department generally are still of the opinion that the best approach to problem of Islamic terrorism is the fostering of democracy in the Middle East. Part of their approach includes treating most of the Islamic states not openly opposed to the US as "our best friends" and offering whatever concilliatory gestures they can to Islam generally. This includes most recently the State Departments appalling capitulation on the Cartoon issue, in essence saying that the Western Press should abide by Sharia Blasphemy laws. They also want to maintain the facade that we can do business with Middle Eastern nations like Saudi Arabia and the UAE as if they were our friends and not part of the overall problem. Hence all the encouraging words about Pakistani, Saudi, and Gulf State help in fighting "the war on terror" and so on.
For Bush to call off the port deal would be to admit essentially that far from being our "best friends" that those states cannot be trusted and that they are ultimately an integral part of the overall problem. Which is why he made the statement: "I want those who are questioning it to step up and explain why all of a sudden a Middle Eastern company is held to a different standard than a Great British company. I am trying to conduct foreign policy now by saying to the people of the world, 'We'll treat you fairly.' The majority of American people are gradually coming to the realization that we can't trust or be best friends with states that promote an ideology that calls for our subjugation or destruction and that our security must be put first no matter how difficult that will ultimately make "Peacefully" establishing democracy and so they can answer the president's silly question.
So while the Bush administration is still pushing the notion of regime change without having to invade every Islamic state, House and Senate Conservatives are increasingly unwilling to pay the possible price for that, and consequently both Frist and Hastert promised efforts to stop the port takeover:
"The decision to finalize this deal should be put on hold until the administration conducts a more extensive review of this matter," said Frist, R-Tenn. "If the administration cannot delay this process, I plan on introducing legislation to ensure that the deal is placed on hold until this decision gets a more thorough review."
Frist, who spoke to reporters in Long Beach, Calif., where he was on a fact-finding tour on port security and immigration issues, said he doesn't oppose foreign ownership, "but my main concern is national security."
House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., joined Frist, saying the administration needed to "conduct a more thorough review." Without offering details, Hastert said in a letter to Bush that "this proposal may require additional congressional action in order to ensure that we are protecting Americans at home."
- SEAGOON
