New administration under Samia Suluhu gives hope after 5 years of hopelessness

DP World.


DP World is a company owned by the government of Dubai in the United Arab Emirates, via a holding company. This holding company is under the direct control of the Ruler of Dubai, Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum, who is also Vice President and Prime Minister of the UAE.
 
On February 23, 2006, DPW volunteered to postpone its takeover of significant operations at the ports to give the White House more time to convince lawmakers that the deal poses no increased risks from terrorism.

According to the website of P&O Ports, the port-operations subsidiary of P&O, DPW would take over stevedore services at 12 East Coast ports including the Port of Portland (Maine); Port of Boston; Port of Davisville; New York City; Port Newark; Port of Philadelphia; Port of Camden; Port of Wilmington; Port of Baltimore; and Virginia locations at Newport News, Norfolk, and Portsmouth.

Additionally, DPW would have taken over P&O stevedoring operations at nine ports along the Gulf of Mexico including the Texas ports of Beaumont, Port Arthur, Galveston, Houston, Freeport, and Corpus Christi, as well as the Louisiana ports of Lake Charles and New Orleans.

Former Senate Majority Leader and 1996 Republican presidential candidate Bob Dole was hired by Dubai Ports World to lobby Congress on its behalf against bipartisan criticism of the deal. Mr. Dole was a special counsel in the Washington office of the law firm of Alston & Bird. DP World hired the firm in 2005 to help shepherd its purchase of the British-based firm P&O.[10]

On March 8, 2006, the House Panel voted 62–2 to block the deal, and Senator Charles Schumer added amendments to a Senate bill to block the deal, causing an uproar in the Senate.[11]

On March 9, 2006, Dubai Ports World released a statement saying they would turn over operation of U.S. ports to a U.S. "Entity".[12] Later that same day, American Enterprise Institute scholar Norm Ornstein reported on PBS's "News Hour" that DP World was considering selling its U.S. operations to Halliburton.[13]

Dubai Ports World eventually sold P&O's American operations to American International Group's asset management division, Global Investment Group for an undisclosed sum.[2] The company is now known as Ports America.[14] In New Jersey, it operates as Port Newark Container Terminal (PNCT). Highstar Capital is shopping the company.[15] In 2017, a Turkish company sought to buy Ports America, which would bring it full circle to 2006.[16]
 
In mid-October 2005, DP World approached the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) to clear regulatory hurdles for a possible acquisition of the British firm P&O. The CFIUS is the multi-agency federal panel that passes judgment on deals with foreign corporations that raise antitrust or national security questions. Soon after, DPW began negotiating the terms of the takeover with P&O.[4] They were advised by former President Bill Clinton to submit to a 45-day review of the acquisition.[5]

In December 2005, Coast Guard intelligence officials raised the possibility of significant security risks associated with the management of some U.S. port operations by a Dubai company, stating in a report that broad intelligence gaps prevented them from assessing the risks.[6]

In February 2006, the stockholders of the Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Company (P&O), a British firm, agreed to a sale of that company to DPW over a bid by PSA International of Singapore. As part of the sale, DPW would assume the leases of P&O to manage major U.S. facilities at the Port of New York and New Jersey, Port of Philadelphia, Port of Baltimore, Port of New Orleans, and the Port of Miami, as well as operations in 16 other ports.
 
After P&O stockholders approved the deal, the arrangement was reviewed by the CFIUS headed by the U.S. Treasury Department. The transfer of leases was approved.

When the deal appeared in the business press, it was noticed by Eller & Company, a Florida firm. Eller has two joint ventures with P&O and it feared becoming an "involuntary partner of DP World," said Michael Kreitzer, Eller's lawyer.[7] According to Kreitzer, Eller hired semi-retired lobbyist Joe Muldoon as a last-ditch effort to persuade Congress to block the deal. Soon, Muldoon and Kreitzer got the attention of Democratic New York Senator Charles E. Schumer and an Associated Press reporter. Within days, Schumer held a press conference calling for a review and the AP ran the story nationally.[7]

Congressional politicians were quick to respond after Schumer's press conference and the AP story put the Dubai Ports deal in the national spotlight. Both Democratic and Republican members of Congress started to question the approval. Republican leaders Dennis Hastert and Bill Frist, who usually work closely with the office of the President, publicly questioned the deal. Frist said "If the administration cannot delay the process, I plan on introducing legislation to ensure that the deal is placed on hold until this decision gets a more thorough review."[8]

On February 22, 2006, President Bush threatened to veto any legislation passed by Congress to block the deal, a veto that would be his first. In a statement to reporters, Bush claimed, "It would send a terrible signal to friends and allies not to let this transaction go through."[9] DP Worlds Chief Operating Officer, Ted Bilkey engaged a number of high-profile lobbying firms to garner congressional support for the deal.[
 
On February 22, 2006, President Bush threatened to veto any legislation passed by Congress to block the deal, a veto that would be his first. In a statement to reporters, Bush claimed, "It would send a terrible signal to friends and allies not to let this transaction go through."[9] DP Worlds Chief Operating Officer, Ted Bilkey engaged a number of high-profile lobbying firms to garner congressional support for the deal.[7]

The controversy created a public and unusually high-profile dispute within the Republican Party, and between the Republican-controlled Congress and the Republican-controlled White House.

On February 23, 2006, DPW volunteered to postpone its takeover of significant operations at the ports to give the White House more time to convince lawmakers that the deal poses no increased risks from terrorism.

According to the website of P&O Ports, the port-operations subsidiary of P&O, DPW would take over stevedore services at 12 East Coast ports including the Port of Portland (Maine); Port of Boston; Port of Davisville; New York City; Port Newark; Port of Philadelphia; Port of Camden; Port of Wilmington; Port of Baltimore; and Virginia locations at Newport News, Norfolk, and Portsmouth.

Additionally, DPW would have taken over P&O stevedoring operations at nine ports along the Gulf of Mexico including the Texas ports of Beaumont, Port Arthur, Galveston, Houston, Freeport, and Corpus Christi, as well as the Louisiana ports of Lake Charles and New Orleans.
 
Former Senate Majority Leader and 1996 Republican presidential candidate Bob Dole was hired by Dubai Ports World to lobby Congress on its behalf against bipartisan criticism of the deal. Mr. Dole was a special counsel in the Washington office of the law firm of Alston & Bird. DP World hired the firm in 2005 to help shepherd its purchase of the British-based firm P&O.[10]

On March 8, 2006, the House Panel voted 62–2 to block the deal, and Senator Charles Schumer added amendments to a Senate bill to block the deal, causing an uproar in the Senate.[11]

On March 9, 2006, Dubai Ports World released a statement saying they would turn over operation of U.S. ports to a U.S. "Entity".[12] Later that same day, American Enterprise Institute scholar Norm Ornstein reported on PBS's "News Hour" that DP World was considering selling its U.S. operations to Halliburton.[13]

Dubai Ports World eventually sold P&O's American operations to American International Group's asset management division, Global Investment Group for an undisclosed sum.[2] The company is now known as Ports America.[14] In New Jersey, it operates as Port Newark Container Terminal (PNCT). Highstar Capital is shopping the company.[15] In 2017, a Turkish company sought to buy Ports America, which would bring it full circle to 2006.[16]
 
According to Bill Gertz, author of Breakdown: How America's Intelligence Failures Led to September 11:

Intelligence and security officials opposed to the deal with Dubai Ports World said ports are vulnerable to the entry of terrorists or illicit weapons because of the large number of containers that enter U.S. territory, regardless of who manages them.[17]
Frank Gaffney, president of the Center for Security Policy wrote:

At the very least, the company will have to be read-in on these ports' security plans as it will have some role in their implementation.[18]

Susan Collins, Republican Senator from Maine (and Homeland Security Committee chairwoman at the time) wrote:

[A] careful review of the 'assurances letter' reveals that DP World is not, in fact, bound to provide the U.S. government with the information it would need to close the intelligence gaps the Coast Guard identified...The language is weak... Indeed, the assurances appear to amount to little more than a restatement of what the FBI or other law enforcement agenc[ies] could gather anyway in the course of an investigation.[19]

After the DP World announced its decision to transfer the U.S. port operations to a U.S. entity, the BBC quoted Daniel T. Griswold, director of the Cato Institute's Center for Trade Policy Studies, as saying that the affair would "send a chilling signal":

It is just assuming that if a company is from the Middle East it is de facto disqualified from investing in the United States, and I think that is a terrible message to send.[20]

Opposition
Edit
The objections to approving the sale centered on arguments about who controls U.S. ports, especially after the September 11, 2001 attacks. Some opposed to the sale have argued that no foreign government should be permitted to own such strategic assets while others argue that port security should remain in the hands of American firms under American control at the very least. Few had offered similar objections to the P&O's ownership, until the proposed DPW takeover brought attention to the situation. Over 80 percent of the terminals in the USA are already controlled by foreign owners.
 
Opposition.


The objections to approving the sale centered on arguments about who controls U.S. ports, especially after the September 11, 2001 attacks. Some opposed to the sale have argued that no foreign government should be permitted to own such strategic assets while others argue that port security should remain in the hands of American firms under American control at the very least. Few had offered similar objections to the P&O's ownership, until the proposed DPW takeover brought attention to the situation. Over 80 percent of the terminals in the USA are already controlled by foreign owners.

Those who expressed opposition to the deal included: The New York Times, Michael Savage, Lindsey Graham, The New Republic, The John Birch Society, Sean Hannity, Lou Dobbs,[21] Laura Ingraham, Bill Frist, and Hillary Clinton,[22] as well as prominent politicians from two different parties, Bob Menendez and John Gibson.[23] Then-Senator Barack Obama stated his opposition to the deal.[24] So did Senators Carl Levin[25] and John Kerry.

The objections commonly raised in public discourse differ from those lodged by Eller & Company, the Florida firm responsible for bringing national attention to the deal. Eller has two joint ventures with P&O and it feared becoming an "involuntary partner of DP World".[7] For them, business rather than security or concerns over the approval process were the overriding factors driving their lobbying efforts to sink the deal.

Several additional arguments have circulated among critics of the deal, including:

Review and approval of the acquisition by CFIUS was not sufficiently transparent and thorough, and never reached the proper level within the administration.
Personal ties between the Bush administration and DP World, such as the appointment of David C. Sanborn to the Transportation Department's Maritime Administration portray a conflict of interest.
 
Support

Editorial support for the deal came from publications including the Financial Times, The Wall Street Journal, the Los Angeles Times, The Washington Post, The Economist and commentators including Tony Snow,[26] Thomas Friedman,[27] and John Warner.[28]

Former President Bill Clinton advised top United Arab Emirates officials on how to address growing U.S. concerns over the acquisition[29] but later stated "He told them that he didn't know the details about the deal."[citation needed] In a press conference, his spokesman Jay Carson stated Clinton "felt that any ports deal should be subject to the full scrutiny process and should also take steps to make ports safer, not maintain the status quo."[30] However, his wife Senator Clinton was publicly opposed to the deal. Clarified in the same interview: "Like Senator Clinton and many others, he is concerned about foreign state ownership of our ports, and, to this end, he is supportive of her legislation,"[citation needed] Carson told CNN.

Former Senate Majority Leader and 1996 Republican presidential candidate Bob Dole was a special counsel in the Washington office of the law firm Alston & Bird. DP World hired the firm in 2005 to help shepherd its purchase of the British-based firm Peninsular and Oriental.[31] His wife, North Carolina Republican Senator Elizabeth Dole, has also raised questions about the Dubai-based company.[32] The chairman of the North Carolina Democratic Party, Jerry Meek, publicly called on Senator Dole to remove herself from "any congressional oversight" of the Dubai port deal and stated, "The fact that Dubai is paying her husband to help pass the deal presents both a financial and ethical conflict of interest for Senator Dole."[33]
 
The Bush administration and other supporters of the deal made the following arguments:

The UAE has proven itself a strategic partner by allowing the U.S. military access to its land, ports and airspace for basing and operations in Iraq and Afghanistan;
The UAE has allied with the U.S. in the Global War On Terror;
Blocking the transfer of operating rights held by a British firm to an Arab firm appears discriminatory against Arabs;
Security would remain a government responsibility as always, and performed by the United States Coast Guard and U.S. Customs and Border Protection.
Israel's largest container shipping firm, Zim Integrated Shipping Services, came out in support of the deal.

"During our long association with DP World, we have not experienced a single security issue in these ports or in any of the terminals operated by DP World... We are proud to be associated with DP World and look forward to working with them into the future." Zim Integrated Shipping Services Chairman of the Board, and main shareholder, Idan Ofer, February 22, 2006.[34][35]
The controversy came shortly after the World Trade Organization's Doha Round of global trade talks. At which many member states called for the U.S. to open up its ports to international competition, in the same way that other industrialized nations have pushed poorer countries into opening up their service sectors (e.g. water, telecoms, etc.)[36]
 
In 2018, another UAE-based port operator, Gulftainer, won 50-year exclusive rights to operate and develop a port in the U.S. State of Delaware.[37] The deal was seen as a breakthrough in UAE-US business relationships and that the "tide has turned" for UAE investors who wish to invest in the U.S.[38]
 
Gulftainer signs 50-year, $600mln concession to Operate and Expand Port of Wilmington in Delaware, USA



The 50-year agreement calls for the United Arab Emirates-based company to invest up to $600 million.

Gulftainer has finalized a 50-year concession agreement with the state of Delaware to operate and develop the Port of Wilmington.

The agreement, signed Tuesday by Gulftainer subsidiary GT USA, includes an investment of up to $600 million in the port to upgrade and expand the terminal.

Based in the United Arab Emirates, Gulftainer is the world’s largest privately owned independent port operator and logistics company. Gulftainer said the port deal represents the largest operation ever run by a UAE company in the United States as well as the largest investment ever by a private UAE company in the country.

The company said the 50-year concession follows a year of negotiations and a thorough evaluation of Gulftainer’s capabilities globally, including in the United States, where it operates the Canaveral Cargo Terminal in Port Canaveral, Fla. The Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States completed a formal review and granted Gulftainer exclusive rights to manage the port.

The deal allowing Gulftainer to lease the Port of Wilmington from the state was announced in March and approved by the Delaware Legislature.

Under terms of the agreement, Gulftainer’s subsidiary GT USA will make annual royalty payments to the state totaling an estimated $13 million over the next decade.

Gulftainer’s planned investment of up to $600 million includes $400 million for a new 1.2 million-TEU container facility at DuPont’s former Edgemoor site, which was acquired by the Diamond State Port Corp. in 2016.

The deal did have its critics. One of the most vocal was Frank Gaffney, the founder and president of the Center for Security Policy, who alleged, “Gulftainer is co-owned by the emir of Sharjah, UAE and Hamid Jafar, Dr. Jafar’s brother and business partner. The Iraqi Jafar brothers share a history of participation in Saddam’s weapons of mass destruction programs.”

And Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., wrote to President Trump in early April asking for a hold on the deal until the CFIUS review was completed. In August, Hunter and his wife, Margaret, were indicted for allegedly misusing campaign funds and he was removed as chair of the House Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation.

But Peter Richards, chief executive officer of Gulftainer, said his company “never has, never will have anything to do with terrorism, with dirty money” and had welcomed the review by federal authorities.

At a signing ceremony Wednesday, Badr Jafar, chairman of Gulftainer’s executive board, said, “This landmark agreement builds on Gulftainer’s 43-year track record of delivering excellence and dependability in ports and logistics operations around the world, and we are confident that this public-private partnership will propel the Port of Wilmington towards becoming the principal gateway of the Eastern Seaboard.
“Since Gulftainer’s entry into the U.S. through our operations in Port Canaveral in 2015, we have discovered major untapped potential in this sector and we will continue to look for attractive investment opportunities in the region,” Jafar added.

In an April 3 interview on the UAE radio station Dubai Eye 103.8, Richards said Gultainer was “looking at ports on the West Coast and also in the Gulf of Mexico as well at this time. We’re even looking towards Nova Scotia.”


View attachment 2663746
 
Nobody signed any document until a due process was observed.

AN INTERACTIVE DIALOGUE ENSURED EVERYBODY WAS ON BOARD.


 
Some of DP WORLD Agreement clauses are too vacuous that you wonder whose interests are being catered.

Ask yourself why extrapolate future income to the next 10 years while all we need to obligate DP WORLD is to pay us royalties of USD 13 MILL PER EVERY PORT PER YEAR?
 
Delaware port operator owes $21M in damages related to buyout dispute

GT USA Wilmington obtained the rights to operate the port for 50 years if it agreed to make upgrades, pay the state $3M annually



The company that privatized operations at the port of Wilmington several years ago owes more than $21 million in damages for breaching an agreement to buy the port’s former stevedoring firm, a Delaware judge ruled Monday.

Vice Chancellor Lori Will also found GT USA Wilmington in contempt for violating a court confidentiality order by using materials it obtained in defending itself in a 2018 lawsuit filed by Murphy Marine Services to negotiate a deal with one of Murphy Marine’s largest customers.

Monday’s ruling came more than a year after a different Chancery Court judge ruled that GT was bound by the terms of a 2018 letter agreement regarding the purchase and sale of 100% of the equity interest of Murphy Marine.

Will ruled Monday that GT violated the binding letter agreement by refusing to negotiate a definitive purchase agreement with Murphy Marine. She also said GT improperly used information obtained from Murphy Marine during the lawsuit to negotiate its own stevedoring contract with Dole Fresh Fruit Company.

Officials with GT USA Wilmington did not immediately respond to an email seeking comment.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…