[Congressional Record Volume 152, Number 25 (Thursday, March 2, 2006)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E269-E270]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                      COLUMN BY THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN

                                 ______
                                 

                         HON. MICHAEL G. OXLEY

                                of ohio

                    in the house of representatives

                        Thursday, March 2, 2006

  Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I would like to bring to the attention of the 
House a recent column by Thomas L. Friedman, which offers acute 
insights into the Dubai Ports World controversy. Mr. Friedman removes 
politics from the debate and presents a clear and concise evaluation of 
the issue.
  I strongly recommend Mr. Friedman's column to my colleagues.

                [From the New York Times, Feb. 24, 2006]

                           War of the Worlds

                        (By Thomas L. Friedman)

       Since 9/11, whenever the Bush team has found itself in 
     political trouble, it has played the national security card 
     against Democrats. It has worked so well that Karl Rove, in a 
     recent speech to the Republican National Committee, made it a 
     campaign theme for 2006.
       He said America today faces ``a ruthless enemy'' and 
     therefore needs ``a commander in chief and a Congress who 
     understand the nature of the threat and the gravity of the 
     moment America finds itself in. President Bush and the 
     Republican Party do. Unfortunately, the same cannot be said 
     for many Democrats.''
       Mr. Rove added: ``Republicans have a post-9/ll worldview, 
     and many Democrats have a pre-9/11 worldview. That doesn't 
     make them unpatriotic--not at all. But it does make them 
     wrong--deeply and profoundly and consistently wrong.''
       I particularly like the line ``that doesn't make them 
     unpatriotic,'' when that was exactly the political slur Mr. 
     Rove was trying to implant.
       So I understand why Democrats were eager to turn the soft-
     on-terrorism card back on President Bush when it was revealed 
     that P&O, the navigation company based in London--which has 
     been managing the ports of New York, New Jersey, Baltimore, 
     New Orleans, Miami and Philadelphia--had been bought by Dubai 
     Ports World, a company owned by the Dubai monarchy in the 
     United Arab Emirates, an Arab Gulf state, and that the Bush 
     team had approved the Dubai takeover of the U.S. port 
     operations.
       I also understand why many Republicans are now running away 
     from the administration. They know that if they don't 
     distance

[[Page E270]]

     themselves from Mr. Bush, some Democrats are going to play 
     this very evocative, very visual ``giving away our ports to 
     the Arabs'' card against them in the coming elections. Yes, 
     you reap what you sow.
       But while I have zero sympathy for the political mess in 
     which the president now finds himself, I will not join this 
     feeding frenzy. On the pure merits of this case, the 
     president is right. The port deal should go ahead. Congress 
     should focus on the NSA wiretapping.
       Not this.
       As a country, we must not go down this road of global 
     ethnic profiling --looking for Arabs under our beds the way 
     we once looked for commies. If we do--if America, the world's 
     beacon of pluralism and tolerance, goes down that road--we 
     will take the rest of the world with us. We will sow the wind 
     and we will reap the whirlwind.
       If there were a real security issue here, I'd join the 
     critics. But the security argument is bogus and, I would add, 
     borderline racist. Many U.S. ports are run today by 
     foreign companies, but the U.S. Coast Guard still controls 
     all aspects of port security, entry and exits; the U.S. 
     Customs Service is still in charge of inspecting the 
     containers; and U.S. longshoremen still handle the cargos.
       The port operator simply oversees the coming and going of 
     ships, making sure they are properly loaded and offloaded in 
     the most cost-effective manner. As my colleague David E. 
     Sanger reported: ``Among the many problems at American ports, 
     said Stephen E. Flynn, a retired Coast Guard commander who is 
     an expert on port security at the Council on Foreign 
     Relations, `who owns the management contract ranks near the 
     very bottom.' ''
       What ranks much higher for me is the terrible trend 
     emerging in the world today: Sunnis attacking Shiite mosques 
     in Iraq, and vice versa. Danish caricatures of the Prophet 
     Muhammad, and violent Muslim protests, including Muslims 
     killing Christians in Nigeria and then Christians killing 
     Muslims. And today's Washington Post story about how some 
     overzealous, security-obsessed U.S. consul in India has 
     created a huge diplomatic flap--on the eve of Mr. Bush's 
     first visit to India--by denying one of India's most 
     respected scientists a visa to America on the grounds that 
     his knowledge of chemistry might be a threat. The U.S. 
     embassy in New Delhi has apologized.
       My point is simple: the world is drifting dangerously 
     toward a widespread religious and sectarian cleavage--the 
     likes of which we have not seen for a long, long time. The 
     only country with the power to stem this toxic trend is 
     America.
       People across the world still look to our example of 
     pluralism, which is like no other. If we go Dark Ages, if we 
     go down the road of pitchfork-wielding xenophobes, then the 
     whole world will go Dark Ages.
       There is a poison loose today, and America--America at its 
     best--is the only antidote. That's why it is critical that we 
     stand by our principles of free trade and welcome the world 
     to do business in our land, as long as there is no security 
     threat. If we start exporting fear instead of hope, we are 
     going to import everyone else's fears right back. That is not 
     a world you want for your kids.

                          ____________________