“Port security” dogs U.S. trade debates

The issue of port security in other nations was a factor in the recent passage of two pieces of legislation in the U.S. On July 20, the House of Representatives Ways and Means Committee authorized a draft bill to sign a trade agreement with Peru. On the same day the full House narrowly authorized a free trade agreement with Oman.

In both cases the legislation had to overcome strenuous objections based on security fears. In the case of the Peru agreement, Democrats objected that the bill would make it difficult to prevent Peru-based companies from taking over port operations in the U.S., a reminder of the fractious argument over the Dubai Ports World attempt – ultimately thwarted – to acquire U.S. port operations a few months ago. However the Peru legislation was ultimately approved intact.

The Oman bill barely squeaked through, with nays outweighing yeas until the last minute. One major objection was, again, that the bill didn’t do enough to prevent Oman-based companies from acquiring U.S. port operations. Defenders of the legislation said that the bill left intact the current means of keeping ports in U.S. hands.