Deaf and Dumb on Port Management?

It hasn't been a big deal that the British giant, Peninsular & Oriental Steam Navigation Co., manages the loading and unloading of cargo in New York and five other major U.S. ports.

But we're living in a post-9/11 world, and the news that Dubai Ports World is taking over P&O for a cool $6.8 billion has ignited a firestorm of recriminations. That is because DPW is owned by the government of the United Arab Emirates, which was a staging point for the 9/11 hijackers.

Republicans and Democrats alike have voiced concern about the ports being put at risk because of potential infiltration of DPW by terrorists and have accused the Bush administration of being deaf and dumb to security concerns. The governors of New York and Maryland -- both Republicans -- are threatening to go to court to block the deal.

The ports include New York, Northern New Jersey, Philadelphia, Baltimore, Miami and New Orleans.

Yet again, the White House was pathetically tone deaf to something that obviously was going to generate major heat. Yet again, it seemed to be surprised by the reaction. Yet again, it was slow to respond. Yet again, it trotted out the hackneyed "trust us" line when it finally did respond.

Has Karl Rove lost his mojo? Do we have a pattern here?

Meanwhile, Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, already on the hot seat for botching the feds' Hurricane Katrina response, says security issues have been reviewed and certain requirements have been put in place, but his comments are not reassuring because everything is classified, you see. In other words, "trust us."

This seems to me to be a good example of people jumping to the conclusion that if something looks bad it is bad.

As it is, P&O and DPW are stevedoring companies. They don't handle cargo or security, the latter being the purview of the Coast Guard and Customs Service. They merely tell longshoremen when and where to load and unload cargo, and virtually all of their employees are local hires.

There's also the oh-so-touchy issue of discrimination against the Arab world. In fact, the UAE is one of the relatively few Arab nations to be a steadfast ally of the U.S. in the war on terror, something that Defense Secretary Rumsfeld was quick to point out in saying the deal should go through.

Nevertheless, port security is a huge issue and no one should feel confident that it has been adequately addressed by an administration with a lousy homeland security record and chronic inability to level with Congress or the public.

Chertoff's predecessor, Tom Ridge, a Bush loyalist, puts it best: The White House needs to explain why the deal won't weaken national security.

Says Ridge:

I think the anxiety and the concern that has been expressed by congressmen and senators and elsewhere is legitimate. The bottom line is, I think we need a little bit more transparency here. . . . So I think it's very appropriate for the administration to go to the Hill and explain why they think they have not compromised security and, in fact, as they've announced, they will enhance and improve security. It's tough to see that right now on the surface.

Right on, Tom.

Until when and if the administration can be more forthcoming, the deal should be put on hold.

UPDATE:

Senate Majority Leader Frist went on record this afternoon as saying the deal should be "put on hold until the administration conducts a more extensive review of this matter." If it won't, said Frist, he'll introduce legislation to put it on hold.

Consider the deal dead.