Bush: Arab Co. Port Deal Should Proceed

At first blush, it is easy to be against this port deal, but I think there may be some underlying reasons involved that are not public. First, let's remember that port security remains with the DHS, not the UAE company, regardless of who takes over the port.

Secondly, what if this port deal provides U.S. intelligence with a new UAE asset to monitor cargo activities before the cargo reaches port? Wouldn't it be worth having the willing cooperation of an stable Arab country to monitor activities in what the terrorist probably view as a friendly country because of its stability? Would it be worth having an inside view in a country where Aljazeera is headquartered and regularly receives communications from al Qaeda? Maybe there are some "big picture" strategic considerations at work with this port deal, and perhaps that is the reason for the strong veto threat.

UPDATE 2/22/2006: From Drudge:

Documents obtained by the AP show the Bush administration's conditions for approving a ports sale required a Dubai company to cooperate with future U.S. investigations and disclose internal operations records on demand... Developing...

Correction: Al Jazeera is headquartered in Qatar, not UAE