It's rare that I take the Bush administration's side in anything, let alone an issue of national security or foreign policy.  With regards to Dubai PortsWorld proposed takeover of several domestic shipping ports, though, I have to say my instincts fall in line with the administration's stance.

How is it any more than xenophobic, isolationist racism?  DPW is owned and run by Muslims; it's a private company controlled by the Royal family of Dubai, a member of United Arab Emirates (UAE).  And yes, a very small percentage of the world's Muslims are militant terrorists aiming to do God knows what—anything from undermining governments in Islamic natures to launching World War III.  On that basis, must we assume that all Arab-owned companies must be in cahoots with that tiny group of terrorists? 

The second-place bid for the British company that currently owns the port management contracts was from a company based in Singapore.  DPW already owns the port assets of American company CSX.  Should we strip them of those rights too because they are Muslim-owned?  What about Emirates Airlines, also owned by the Dubai royal family?  Should they fly to separate, secure airports from here on out?

The UAE is one of our allies.  It's one of the few states that we can conscionably align ourselves with; it has an operational federal courts system and is one of the most liberal regimes in the Middle East when it comes to women's rights.  Dubai is a cosmopolitan world capital and a tourist destination.

More business links with the Middle East is a good thing, not a bad thing.  Trade is a good thing.  Cooperation is a good thing.  Backing out of business deals because the other side of the deal happens to be Muslim is not a good thing. 

No one has suggested that American dock workers would be replaced or displaced; it's not like they're gonna put Osama bin Laden and a gang of dudes in turbans with AK-47s and pocket-sized nukes in charge of Port Newark.  Hell, there might even be security advantages in having one of our Arab allies run some of our sensitive ports—but who would know whether that's the case or not? 
 
I get where people's hesitation comes from, but it just isn't rational.  The Bush administration should have anticipated that this would be an issue and got out ahead of it before it became a problem.  What stuns me is that politicians on the left have been running each other over in a race to get in front of the cameras and be the first to play the "national security" card back in the Republicans' faces.  It's short-sighted.  It's isolationist, not internationalist.  It further diminishes our already tattered reputation in the Muslim world. 

Even Bush gets it, for once: "It would send a terrible signal to friends and allies not to let this transaction go through."  Worse yet, it would give another shred of evidence to those who Muslims who hate America and the West that America and the West hates them back.  It deepens the divide.

Our leaders should be giving us thoughtful guidance and substantive information about this deal if it is so important, not exploiting our fears for partisan gain.  That's the lowest common denominator.  Just because the Republicans used national security like a club to beat down the Democrats doesn't mean that the Democrats should try to do the same back, because in the end, it's never going to work—it's hollow scare tactics.  The critics of the DPW takeover of ports must offer a substantive, rational argument as to why the deal is bad for American security interests—and propose an alternative that's both safer and practical (as it stands today, there are not nearly enough American companies to take over all port management operations).

Either the spin cycle is working or Americans truly fear the possibility of DPW taking over American ports—a Rasmussen survey showed 64% do not think the sale should be allowed (and, interestingly, 39% of those surveyed didn't know foreign companies already manage domestic ports and 46% were not sure if foreign companies managed domestic ports).   Maybe I am the irrational one here, but until someone shows me some concrete reasons that DPW taking over port management duties in American cities is a risk to our national security, I'm not buying it.

>> Wikipedia on the Dubai Ports World Controversy