| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Politix |
| Question for pro-UAE port control voters - What about Iranian investments in Dubai? |
| 2006-03-01 |
| With Secretary Rice pushing to bring Iran before the Security Council, is the United States also willing to impose sanctions on Dubai? The sanctions against South Africa to end apartheid were effective because the financial interests of white South Africa were brought to their knees. Before the Bush administration hands over key port operations to Dubai Ports World, someone in the White House ought to vet the considerable ties between Dubai and Iran. If we "follow the money" to punish Iran for non-compliance with IAEA requirements, then the money trail is going to lead straight to Dubai. The Energy Information Administration of the U.S. Department of Energy reports that "Iran is one of Dubai's major trading partners, accounting for 20 to 30 percent of Dubai's business." The daily newspapers of the United Arab Emirates regularly encourage Iranians to travel and invest in Dubai. The UAE daily Al-Bayan writes: Iranians can easily travel to Dubai. They can embark on a ship in one of the Iranian port cities and come to Dubai. They will arrive in Dubai within 45 minutes. The Iranian association in Dubai is larger than the associations of other countries. The Iranian association has a football field and traditional restaurants. There are both public and private Iranian schools in Dubai where Iranian students can continue their studies at different levels. Iranian universities also have branches in Dubai. The Islamic Azad University's Dubai branch accepts students in various fields of study. An Iranian Business Directory published in Dubai lists 7,073 Iranian companies operating in Dubai, in 31 different business categories ranging from banking and finance to oil and real estate. There is an Iranian Trade Center in Dubai that regularly holds international business shows and an Iranian Business Council operating in Dubai to promote Iranian investment in Dubai. By the end of 2006, Dubai calculates that some $300 billion will have been moved from Iran to Dubai by over 400,000 Iranians. Hashami Rafsanjani – the former prime minister of Iran who began his career as a pistachio farmer and itinerant preacher in the rural mosques – is now a billionaire. In addition to stashing millions in bank accounts in Switzerland and Luxembourg, Rafsanjani reportedly owns whole vacation resorts on Dubai's world-class beaches. Iran's ambassador to Dubai and the Sheikh Sultans who rule Dubai hold regular meetings discussing how Iran and Dubai can expand their trade relations, with Dubai holding an open door to the capital flight that has swept Iran since the ultra-conservative administration of President Ahmadinejad has taken over. If the United States or Israel should get close to a military strike on Iran's nuclear facilities, we should not be surprised to see the wealthy mullahs and their cronies make their escape to their Dubai vacation homes. How possibly can we invite DPW to learn every intimate detail of U.S. port security when Dubai has such close economic ties to the top hierarchy in Iran? In "Atomic Iran," I specifically chose the scenario that terror sleeper cells in America would seek to obtain an improvised nuclear device manufactured in Iran and shipped into the United States in a container delivered to a New York area port. This is a prediction I pray will never happen, but can the Bush administration assure America that terrorists supported by Iran will not penetrate DPW just to educate themselves on how porous our ports yet remain? Let's return to the UAE daily Al-Bayan for more documentation of the Iran-Dubai nexus: Since three years ago, when the purchase of houses was legalized for foreign nationals, Iranian investors have rushed to invest in housing construction. They even rushed to the stock exchange markets and bought major Emirati companies. According to statistics, some 10 to 30 percent of real estate transactions are conducted by Iranians and even the tallest skyscrapers in the UAE belong to Iranians. Total real estate transactions with Iranians have increased 10 percent in comparison with last year. So, the question to Secretary Rice is this: Are you going to sanction Iranian investments in Dubai, or not? Iran has nearly $200 million a day in windfall oil profits – a number that will only escalate if the Iranian nuclear crisis causes oil prices to spike even more. With the average Iranian still living on under $2,000 in annual income, President Ahmadinejad has failed to keep his campaign promise to redistribute Iran's oil wealth to Iran's struggling population. No wonder Iran feels no pain at the prospect of Security Council sanctions. Not only is Iran in the final stages of concluding a $100 billion oil deal with China, there is always Dubai, where the investment climate is favorable and the sun always shines. --------------------------------------------- How possibly can we invite DPW to learn every intimate detail of U.S. port security when Dubai has such close economic ties to the top hierarchy in Iran? [Foghorn Leghorn] Is any of this penetrating that pretty little blue bonnet of yours? [/Foghorn Leghorn] Especially when a most likely scenario involving a terrorist nuclear attack on American soil includes the way that "terror sleeper cells in America would seek to obtain an improvised nuclear device manufactured in Iran and shipped into the United States in a container delivered to a New York area port". The UAE are not our friends. They are facilitating the Iranian mullahs in outplacement of their corrupt wealth. Do we really need to find out that this Taleban supporting country where 18% of the people admire Osama bin Laden and over half consider themselves "Muslim first" is willing to export an Iranian nuclear to our shores? They will have access to containers being trans-shipped by friendly nations whose point of origin might not set off any alarms. I repeat, this is a really, really bad idea. Do the supporters of this handoff still maintain that it is not fraught with loopholes and the potential for vital breaches in our nation's security? |
| Posted by:Zenster |
| #17 fair enough. I was wondering, that's all. |
| Posted by: 2b 2006-03-01 23:50 |
| #16 2b, if I recall correctly, Rafael was born in Czechoslovakia (which gave me a thrill -- the trailing daughters still sing "Kola, kola mlinsky" with a Brno accent), then at some point made his way west, after he'd lived there long enough to thoroughly loathe Communism. I do hope I haven't been thrilled in vain. ;-) |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2006-03-01 21:54 |
| #15 Now, now, now.... I assumed Howl at the Moon was related to "Howl at the moon, Zenster." and you did too. |
| Posted by: Bobby 2006-03-01 21:46 |
| #14 Yes it is easier to be an ass than to engage in constructive, even if heated, debate. Glad to see someone else is also thinking about these things: Pace of protectionism quickens And btw, use your regular name, don't be a coward! |
| Posted by: Rafael 2006-03-01 21:38 |
| #13 What if ... what if ... what if people BUY OUR PRODUCTS? Huh, what then? And what if ... what if WE BUY THEIR COMPANIES. Oh, lordy, what a mess the world would be in. An', an', an' ... what if ... |
| Posted by: Moon is Full 2006-03-01 21:10 |
| #12 "Following crowds" .... not good, I agree. |
| Posted by: Visitor 2006-03-01 21:01 |
| #11 I take it that you are not from around here, are ya? If true, why the Bush Derangement Syndrome? Wouldn't you be better off focusing on your own government, where your opinion actually matters? Hey, excellent questions. Here are my honest answers: You see, as a Canadian, my well being is tied to your well being, assuming you are an American, of course. This is something most Canadians don't realize (and most Americans don't care about, but that's how it goes). We do not live in a vacuum. Evidence of that is the morning of 9-11, when downtown Toronto emptied rather quickly and business quite literally, stopped. I do not have Bush Derangement Syndrome. I supported and continue to support Bush on most everything. I still support Bush on the Iraq war, even after all this missing-WMD fiasco, bad intelligence, or whatever. I was ecstatic when Bush got elected over Gore in 2000. I was upset when Bush senior lost to Clinton. And you can trace this support all the way back to Reagan. The reasons for this are documented on Rantburg, going back to well before .com's days here. There's one thing that I hold way above my support for Bush, however, and that's intellectual honesty. If something doesn't calculate, then I say it outright. Even if it's not popular with the Rantburg crowd. I'm sorry but this just happens to be one of Bush's brain farts. Not long after he announces that America should strive for independence from middle eastern oil, he does this (the ports deal). Is he expected to be taken seriously? Even if - ignoring the security aspects - there's nothing wrong with this, what is so wrong with wanting ports/energy companies/whatever to remain in American hands? What if, after answering Bush's call to develop an alternate energy source, this technology is also bought up by foreigners. Is this okay too? Please. Everything has its limits. .com and I haven't been able to connect on things right from the start. There's a history there. But so what. I don't like following crowds anyway. |
| Posted by: Rafael 2006-03-01 20:57 |
| #10 It's the moolahs that need a bitch slapping. I agree totally. I would prefer that the mullahs all be taking the dirt nap as we type. Unfortunately, it is also the mullahs who have all the big bucks, the intention of acquiring nuclear weapons, the desire to attack America with those nuclear weapons and the connections within the UAE to make it happen (if, indeed, it can happen). Knowing what sort of irrational hatred the mullahs possess for America makes it just a little too close to home and I elect to err on the side of caution. If terrorism has taught us to do one thing, it is to err on the side of caution. Why do you think you never see me whingeing about the Patriot Act or domestic spying? I'd rather internal enemies be pursued in some manner than to see them go unaddressed. This is the same policy I carry forward with respect to the ports. |
| Posted by: Zenster 2006-03-01 19:55 |
| #9 Yes, mainly because it has not been demonstrated that there are any. So, I take it you don't regard the UAE not being required to keep a complete set of books in the United States to be a loophole that you can drive a Mack truck through? I do. |
| Posted by: Zenster 2006-03-01 19:44 |
| #8 Rafael, excuse my ignorance - I don't have time to read every post. But from previous posts of yours that I have read, I take it that you are not from around here, are ya? If true, why the Bush Derangement Syndrome? Wouldn't you be better off focusing on your own government, where your opinion actually matters? |
| Posted by: 2b 2006-03-01 19:17 |
| #7 Seriously? Lol. Are you really this dense? Of course - to both questions, yours and mine. Take another gulp, sonny. |
| Posted by: .com 2006-03-01 17:57 |
| #6 I'll take Bush's word over yours any day. A true believer, eh Yankee? Good. Don't change. Y'know, you've got that contrarian thingy down pat, now. True, if I see something I don't agree with, I usually speak out against it. So seriously...you still hoping or what? |
| Posted by: Rafael 2006-03-01 17:48 |
| #5 Lol, Raphael. Take your meds Qanuck - and lay off the local Kool Aid. I'll take Bush's word over yours any day. Y'know, you've got that contrarian thingy down pat, now. Don't change. You 'n VBS are in competition for RB Jester. |
| Posted by: .com 2006-03-01 17:37 |
| #4 the Iranian people are largely pro-American, pro-Western. Oh my. Someone's still living in a bubble. This "support Bush at all costs" is getting way out of hand. Are you still holding out hope that Bush will strike Iran, .com? Or has that hope dimmed a little? |
| Posted by: Rafael 2006-03-01 17:31 |
| #3 Repeat after me: the Iranian people are largely pro-American, pro-Western. It's the moolahs that need a bitch slapping. I suggest reading some of Michael Ledeen's written work, take a valium, and call your physican in the morning. |
| Posted by: Captain America 2006-03-01 17:03 |
| #2 Howl at the moon, Zenster. |
| Posted by: .com 2006-03-01 15:51 |
| #1 Do the supporters of this handoff still maintain that it is not fraught with loopholes and the potential for vital breaches in our nation's security? Yes, mainly because it has not been demonstrated that there are any. |
| Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2006-03-01 15:12 |