The Dedly Blog

9/11 Beats Free Trade

It was just announced that Dubai Ports World will sell port operations over to an American company or subsidiary. Free Traders will argue that this is bad for the economy, US businesses abroad, and foreign relations in general. But the negative reaction of the American public shouldn't come as a surprise.

For the past 4 1/2 years, the administration and Republican political strategists have been ramming 9/11 down the throats of the electorate and anyone across the planet willing to listen. In the 2002 mid-term election it was used to defeat Democrats in Congress and in 2004 it was used to do the same as well as re-elect the president (the poor choice for Democratic candidate notwithstanding). How else could Constitutionally questionable activities like The Patriot Act and the Domestic Terrorist Surveillance Program (warrantless wiretaps) meet little resistance from the general public.

But the administration's job of whipping the public into a frenzy with fear has worked too well. Resistance to the ports deal began as grass roots outrage. The public contacted their representatives who, in turn, spewed their own outrage. In a rare display of bipartisanship, Congress moved against the President, threatening to use legislation to block the deal. Rather than back down, the President has threatened to use his veto for the first time. "Trust me," he says.

Free Trade has always been a hard sell with the majority of Americans. It never really mattered to most Americans. It's always been the province of investors, business owners, and the wealthy. As manufacturing jobs went to China and IT and service jobs flow to India, a low level revolt among the masses simmered, but has gone mostly ignored. Unemployment has dropped and low prices at Wal-Mart soothed the sore feelings of the public. Free Trade continued.

But now Free Trade is going up against National Security. In essence, the upper class vs. everyone else. While it is the upper class that puts money into the coffers of politicians, it is the sheer numbers of the middle class that elects a candidate. Sure, one can try to spin their way out of this, but how does spin beat spin? The public doesn't give a damn about Free Trade if it means that National Security could be compromised giving terrorists easier access to the country. The perception is that the administration is putting the public at risk so that the wealthy can get wealthier. Right or wrong, that's not a healthy perception for politicos.

The administration woud do well to remember the time when we were all New Yorkers.

While Dubai Ports World has not been accused of aiding and abetting terrorists, and Dubai itself is about as pro-Western one can get in the Arab world, the United Arab Emirates is a bit murkier. Two of the 9/11 hijackers were from the U.A.E. and money laundering is suspected to have occurred there as well.

Where do we go from here? Once the public became educated that most American ports were operated by foreign entities, the outrage escalated. How could foreigners be allowed to own our ports? I wouldn't be surprised if there was an effort to nationalize them as a result. It probably wouldn't succeed but I wouldn't rule out the possibility. Protectionist doesn't carry the same negative connontation among the general public that liberaldoes.

posted by DED at 2:10 PM