The Corner

Charles Krauthammer…

…pins his skepticism about the Dubai deal today to the fact that DP World will gain information about our ports and that potentially will get in the hands of bad guys. I think this is the only even remotely convincing reason to oppose the deal. But I don’t find it persuasive. First of all, since the UAE is part of the Container Security Initiative, people in that government already know what we are doing security-wise at foreign ports. And, as I understand it, foreign ports are our chief point of vulnerability. So if we can’t trust the UAE, we already have a big problem.

As for the ports here, people in the UAE will find out more about their operations, but I’m told this isn’t really top-secret information. A friend who has worked in this area e-mailed me this: “I saw Krauthammer’s argument, but my colleagues who have really worked with port-specific security plans seem unconvinced that there is much of a marginal increase in risk when so many players–importers, port owners, brokers, retailers, shippers, unions, etc.–already have access to that information.”

That said, there’s nothing wrong with a delay, which NR endorses here. Here’s my personal take.

Rich Lowry — Rich Lowry is the editor of National Review. He can be reached via email: 

Most Popular


Ivy-League Schools Wither

A  number of liberal bastions are daily being hammered — especially the elite university and Silicon Valley. A Yale and a Stanford, or Facebook and Google, assume — for the most part rightly — that each is so loudly progressive that the public, federal and state regulators, and politicians would of ... Read More