| Opinion/The Review

Larger text Larger text Smaller text Smaller text | Order Photo Reprints

The Gulftainer deal: Ports of peril?

Email Newsletters

Click here to sign up for one of our email newsletters.

Letters home ...

Traveling abroad for personal, educational or professional reasons?

Why not share your impressions — and those of residents of foreign countries about the United States — with Trib readers in 150 words?

The world's a big place. Bring it home with Letters Home.

Contact Colin McNickle (412-320-7836 or

Daily Photo Galleries

Friday, Aug. 1, 2014, 8:57 p.m.

A key congressman's call to review the national security implications of a Middle Eastern company's deal to operate a U.S. cargo port should be heeded.

Based in the United Arab Emirates (UAE), a U.S. ally nevertheless identified as a funding source for the 9/11 terrorist attacks, privately owned Gulftainer has a 35-year contract to run Florida's Port Canaveral, near a busy cruise port and a Navy nuclear-submarine facility. Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., who chairs a House subcommittee on maritime transportation, wants “a full national security review” of the deal by the interagency Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, The Washington Times reports.

Congressional opposition led UAE-based Dubai Ports World to abandon U.S. port plans in 2007. Gulftainer concerns mirror those raised by Hutchison Whampoa — closely tied to China's military — running Suez and Panama canal port facilities and upgrading a Mexican port for Wal-Mart. Security experts' biggest concern — who screens shipping containers — is amplified because a 2007 law requiring all U.S.-bound containers be screened before loading overseas hasn't been enforced due to compliance-deadline extensions.

With one container enough to carry a terrorist weapon of mass destruction, a full review of the Gulftainer deal should be a given.

Subscribe today! Click here for our subscription offers.



Show commenting policy

Most-Read Editorials

  1. Saturday essay: Seasonal collide
  2. Election 2015: Do your homework
  3. Grandparents v. Parents: A sound ruling