http://atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/HD19Ak02.html

Another Dubai deal, another security row

In a deal similar to one that led to the Dubai ports furor in the US earlier this year, Dubai International Capital has purchased for US$1.24 billion Doncasters Group Ltd, a private British aerospace manufacturer that works on sensitive weapons programs such as the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF).

The administration of US President George W Bush is conducting a security review of the takeover, and then it will present its findings to Congress, where many of the same factions that

<!-- if (!document.phpAds_used) document.phpAds_used = ','; phpAds_random = new String (Math.random()); phpAds_random = phpAds_random.substring(2,11); document.write (&quot;<&quot; + &quot;script language='JavaScript' type='text/javascript' src='&quot; document.write (&quot;http://goldsea.com/GAAN/adjs.php?n= &quot; + phpAds_random);document.write(&quot;&amp;what=zone :117&amp;block=1&quot; document.write (&quot;&amp;exclude=&quot; + document.phpAds_used); if (document.referrer) document.write (&quot;&amp;referer=&quot; + escape(document.referrer)); document.write (&quot;'><&quot; + &quot;/script>&quot; //-->
<A href=&quot;http://goldsea.com/GAAN/adclick.php?n=a923457d&quot; target=_blank><IMG alt=&quot;&quot; src=&quot;http://goldsea.com/GAAN/adview.php?w...a923457d&quot; border=0></A>

expressed concern and outrage over the ports deal are beginning to grumble about the Doncasters takeover.

Democrats and Republicans alike lambasted the Bush administration's approval of the sale of British P&O Line to Dubai Ports World, since it would place terminal operations of six US ports in foreign hands - worse, in the hands of a government that many in Congress labeled as being an unreliable partner in the "war on terrorism". The failed ports deal forced Washington to postpone talks with the United Arab Emirates on a free-trade agreement. The proposed pact is part of a greater US goal to create a Middle East Free Trade Area by 2013.

The White House and others that support deals with the UAE warn that restricting trade over putative security concerns would turn away investors in Arab states awash with petrodollars and ultimately harm the US and global economies. However, Dubai seems to have taken the matter in stride. In a conciliatory move, Dubai Ports World agreed to sell its stake in US port operations, which allows the firm to turn its attention to more profitable port operations in emerging markets, such as India.

During a visit to Washington, Sheikh Lubna al-Qasimi, minister of economics in the UAE, stated, "We are long-standing allies of the United States. Our relations are larger than that. This is global trade." US trade with the UAE has increased steadily in recent years, punctuated by major deals involving Boeing, ExxonMobil and Lockheed Martin.

While not yet garnering much attention in the media, certain Congress members have challenged the proposed Doncasters deal. Two members of the House Armed Services Committee, Democrats John Barrow and Ike Skelton, have raised questions about national security.

"I'm not against foreigners investing in this country as long as we don't sell them something we are not supposed to sell them," Barrow said. "But I am concerned about selling off our national-security infrastructure. We are selling off the military-industrial complex bit by bit."

The $250 billion F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program is intended to create a next-generation stealth fighter that would replace several current strike aircraft. While most of the jets will be used by the United States, other countries such as the United Kingdom, Italy, Australia, Canada, Denmark, Turkey and Norway also intend to purchase the aircraft. The JSF is scheduled to be operational by 2009.

As was the case with the ports deal, Democrats will surely capitalize on another opportunity to paint Republicans as being weak on national security as the mid-term congressional elections draw near. Republicans, despite controlling both the House of Representatives and Senate, are increasingly finding themselves on the defensive, caught between a White House mired in political scandal and poor approval numbers and emboldened Democrats looking to regain control of Congress.

The Doncasters deal will certainly fall under increased scrutiny in the coming weeks. After the Dubai Ports World debacle, the Bush administration will find itself at the center of another complicated national-security debate that will go beyond party lines and standard economic discourse. However, an expensive, experimental weapons project will likely elicit a less visceral public reaction than did the issue of port security.

Lawmakers must decide whether to embrace economic nationalism or uphold the free-trade principles that they typically champion. While Dubai has ostensibly looked past the criticisms raised in the failed ports deal, a similar outcome in the current matter could very well scare away foreign investors, Arab and otherwise, and signal that the United States is not necessarily open for business.

Published with permission of the Power and Interest News Report, an analysis-based publication that seeks to provide insight into various conflicts, regions and points of interest around the globe.

I dont like this at all, an arab company with access to our latest fighter tech. No sir dont like it at all.

I dont like this at all, an arab company with access to our latest fighter tech. No sir dont like it at all.

Rabs, I whole-heartedly concur. This doesn't sit well with me at all, as well.

Originally Posted by Rabs

I dont like this at all, an arab company with access to our latest fighter tech. No sir dont like it at all.

Ditto for me too. Sell them whatever but don't sell them the means to fight against the US with its own weapons, IF they ever do turn hostile. But as history and current events has shown the world, extremism has no limits....

Very sad about the Tel Aviv bombing of that restaurant during Passover. It's one of Judaism's holiest times and the dirty extremists used it to kill innocent civilians spending time with their families. If it were reversed and the Jews attacked Muslims during say.... Ramadan? You can bet your ass 99% of the Middle East would be calling for deaths. I applaud the reservations the Israelis has shown in thsi matter.

Okay, that was completely off-topic; sorry.

I had no problem with the whole ports thing, but this makes me raise an eyebrow. It's one thing to have an arab company merely writing the checks to the same American workers that have always worked the ports.

It's another when an arab company potentially has access to secret documents on our top-of-the-line fighter aircraft.

Anyone know what parts of the JSF this brittish company actually works on?

Pfff let them have them! The Dutch signed a multi billion dollar deal for the JSF (NATO member, long ally.. the works) and we signed. We stopped supporting the Euro-fighter project because this would be better, cheaper etc. All of a sudden the US doesn't deliver what they promised. The deal was that special technology would remain in the US, but we see nothing of it. End result: we have waisted lots of money, we have incomplete fighters and another sizeable dent in our trust of US trade intentions!

So let them have the aircrafts. The way the allies are treated I am very curious to see what the Arabs will receive.

does anyone honestly think that with the current quality of training in the region, they could challenge an air-force like the USAF even IF they had equally capable aircraft??

does anyone honestly think that with the current quality of training in the region, they could challenge an air-force like the USAF even IF they had equally capable aircraft?


ignore the double post pls

This all might be for naught as the entire JSF program is in some jeapordy, espically if the British pull out.

This all might be for naught as the entire JSF program is in some jeapordy, espically if the British pull out.

Did'nt Blair announce that that had been worked out. The US agreed to give over the source code in return for a promise to not poliferate the tech.

Does anyone here know anything at all about what goes into a weapon system like the JSF?

Do you not realize that there are numerous contractors and sub-contractors who are involved in a program this big? Raytheon produces some of the navigational and radar defenses but know nothing about building a JSF. One contractor does not a JSF make. If the contractor is sold to a company that is not sanctioned to produce components of a system, the prime contractors have the right to immediately pull the contract.

This system is not even scheduled to hit the hangar until 2009, the whole program could be scrapped or changed from one configuration to another, making most hardware unusable. Just because you work for a jigsaw puzzle company making a small piece of blue sky doesn't mean you can fire up and build a mil spec puzzle. There are small companies that literally make thousands of a small bolt in weapons systems and never know anything about the full up platform. That's done for a purpose because of problems like this.