Home > REPORT: Oman Trade Pact Permits Foreign Ownership Of US Nat’l Security Assets

REPORT: Oman Trade Pact Permits Foreign Ownership Of US Nat’l Security Assets

by Open-Publishing - Thursday 20 July 2006
2 comments

Trade-Exchange Rates Parties Governments USA

http://www.workingforchange.com/blo...

REPORT: Oman Trade Pact Permits Foreign Ownership Of US Nat’l Security Assets
By David Sirota
7.18.06

In an explosive report tonight, top House Democrats discovered provisions in the controversial Oman Free Trade Agreement that would permit foreign ownership of U.S. ports and other key national security assets. Three Democrats and one Republican held an emergency press conference today to expose the provisions just before the House is scheduled to vote on the Oman pact on Thursday. As Reuters reports, "Rep. John Murtha, a Pennsylvania Democrat who serves on the House Defense Appropriations subcommittee, said the pact would allow companies such as Dubai Ports World to acquire U.S. port operations by establishing a shell company in Oman." Those provisions might also allow foreign ownership of other key national security assets, considering just after the recent Dubai Ports controversy, that country went ahead with plans to purchase a major U.S. defense contractor.

Last month, lawmakers from both parties in the U.S. Senate joined hands to pass the Oman Free Trade Agreement - which is being pushed aggressively by the Bush administration and its largest corporate donors. Lawmakers ignored major labor, human rights and environmental objections to the pact put forward by more than 400 union, religious and consumer groups. Among those voting for the pact in the Senate were Mike DeWine (R-OH) and Joe Lieberman (D-CT), two Senators facing tough re-election bids who could face renewed criticism in their home states that they have sold out their constituents.

The House vote is expected to be much closer than the Senate vote, and the explosive news tonight puts a new level of pressure on congressional lawmakers of both parties not to sell out. To date, a number of Democratic lawmakers have yet to say how they will vote on the Oman pact. Corporate lobbyists are aggressively targeting the 15 Democrats who last year capitulated to Big Money’s demands and backed the corporate-written Central American Free Trade Agreement. They are also targeting members of the New Democratic Coalition - the group of Democrats most closely affiliated with the Democratic Leadership Council.

This vote is going to be extremely close - and bought-off lawmakers are scrambling to hide and/or obscure the details of these national security provisions. But as Reuters notes, even the Bush adminstration’s trade representative acknowleges that the national security provisions create an exploitable security hole. That means that regardless of the propaganda efforts, the upcoming vote will put House members on record not only on economic issues, but on national security issues. Are these lawmakers going to sell out America’s national security? Or are they going to stand up to Big Money interests and say this trade deal and others like it are unacceptable? Contact your House Member immediately and tell them you expect them to put America’s national security first.

UPDATE: It has come to my attention that Rep. Sherrod Brown (D) and Lou Dobbs have both previously spoken out on these exact national security concerns with regard to the Oman Free Trade Deal. I apologize for not citing them earlier - they originally broke the story.

Forum posts

  • Most of the US is ALREADY owned by foreign interests. How is this news?

    • Assets owned by other nations are appropriated through the debt of the U.S. government; this provision allows direct purchase of assets that are vital to the well being of the American society.

      In some respects this is a good thing when considering that the world is headed towards a borderless existence and this will allow the haves to keep separate from the have-nots. We can already see the starting phases of "borderlessness" — the people who are most pro are business which wants cheap labor. The opposite side of this that it drives down the cost of labor of the native. Thus, Mexicans migrating north puts pressure on the U.S. citizen to compete for wage. Over time, as Mexico develops it’s infrastructure and the society evolves, U.S. citizens will be migrating down to compete for the same-level wages with the Mexician citizen.

      It will reflect what has happenned to money (tokens of exchange) over the last twenty years in particular. The velocity of money has increased and it moves relatively freely between money centers. That is, it does not honor borders as it once did.

      For a good understanding of this read up on the WTO or prior to it the 26 or annual meetings that were held, the last being the "Doha Talks" held in Qatar.

      For those countries that are not part of this grand matrix, like Iraq, Iran, etc. well, they are (or will be) folded in by way of war. (One of the several major reasons for present wars that is not publisized or obious reasons.)

      The many to many relationships for these wars and migration and labor-tasks (and above all the faith in some printed paper) is a complex matrix and many millions of man years have been spent in dissertations. It is not easy to expresss in a reply, let alone in available books. A person would go crazy in understanding all of it.