U.S.-Arab Tradeline: May 2007

Page:


Some of the media that covered NUSACC’s response to the DP World controversy.

The deal also raised troubling questions about the appropriateness of the United States to serve as the standard-bearer for free trade and direct investment. The U.S. has been encouraging Arab nations to adopt laws that will promote the free flow of goods, services, capital, people, and ideas across national boundaries. This policy is clearly out of sync with the strong protectionist message that was sent by the U.S. Congress. Ironically, the United Arab Emirates is at the top of the list of Arab nations that are being urged to sign a Free Trade Agreement (FTA) with the United States.

Concluded NUSACC’s David Hamod, “There is no question that our nation’s security is paramount. But strong commitments to homeland security do not justify double standards or racial discrimination toward foreign investors. If our country cannot abide by rules consistently, and if we cannot adhere to a single standard that applies to all, then savvy investors will simply take their money elsewhere.”

David Hamod, with CNBC anchor Carl Quintanilla and Terry Jeffery, debating the DP World controversy on CNBC PowerLunch.

“Part of the message that’s being sent here is that this Dubai company played by the rules, they won fair and square, and then Congress moved the goal posts. As you know, capital is a coward. If overseas investors come away with the impression that the United States is not a transparent country, that the process is not reliable, then we’re concerned that they’ll take their business elsewhere.”

– David Hamod quoted on CNBC

NUSACC: DP World Debacle May Have Long-Term “Chilling Effect”

The National U.S.-Arab Chamber of Commerce has always been a strong proponent of free trade and foreign direct investment. So when the DP World episode hit the front pages of U.S. newspapers in 2006, NUSACC was quick to respond.

David Hamod, NUSACC’s President and CEO, expressed concern on CNN that some U.S. policymakers were applying double standards to DP World that they would not apply to other international port managers. He said, “If this were Singapore, China, Japan, Denmark or some of the other [foreign] carriers that do logistics in the U.S. ports, would

David Hamod during a CNN interview by Jim Clancy.

He told CNN, “Our concern: It is likely to have a chilling effect on U.S.-Arab relations. We are concerned about the long term effects of this deal.”

Hamod went on to caution: “The United States needs to be very careful that this situation does not become an exercise in Arab-

bashing, with Members of Congress fanning the flames of anti-Arab hysteria.”

Some excerpts from other interviews
with NUSACC:

•	Forbes – “If [foreign investors] feel like they have to go through the whole political process in the United States to buy a company, they’re going to say, to heck with it.”
•	Financial Times – “My concern is that U.S. companies may not be invited to bid or, if they are invited, they will be dealt with more skeptically than in the past.”
•	Reuters – “The detractors in the UAE are saying ‘see we told you so. The United States is lecturing us on opening our borders for goods, services, capital, ideas and people and yet at the very same time, there’s a strong anti-Arab protectionist message coming out of Congress’.”
•	CNBC – “Part of the message that’s being sent here is that this Dubai company played by the rules, they won fair and square, and then Congress moved the goal posts. As you know, capital is a coward. If overseas investors come away with the impression that the United States is not a transparent country, that the process is not reliable, then we’re concerned that they’ll take their business elsewhere.”

33 US-Arab Tradeline • June 2007

«« previous page next page »»