Imbroglio facing Dubai and Hollywood

As George Orwell put it, "political language ... is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind". No kidding.

This week, two cities half a world apart braced for an onslaught of hysterical lobbying that has everything to do with dangerously distorted politics and little to do with the issues at hand: whether either of two highly acclaimed films deserves the ultimate prize, the Oscar; whether the national security review that cleared a commercial transaction involving the management of some US ports is enough for DP World to go through with the acquisition.

Given their opponents, it's no surprise that Dubai and Hollywood failed to defuse their respective public relations crises. While Dubai encountered widespread bipartisan Congressional opposition to its takeover plans within 10 days of the deal becoming public knowledge, this week it gained a new and potent opponent, the Anti-Defamation League (ADL). Indeed, Hollywood and Dubai faced a similar conundrum: political muscle flexing of pro-Israeli lobbies, and in the case of Hollywood, the Israeli government.

Obviously, there is no way to equate movies that cost barely $75 million with a port operation valued at over $6 billion. That isn't the point.

If both stick to their guns, so to speak, and refuse to give in to ridiculous demagogues, they might just shatter a few illusions on both sides of the world: In the East, those who decry Jewish control over Hollywood; in the West, those who imagine Dubai overrun with Arab terrorists determined to conquer the shores of New Jersey. Their opposing stereotypes mask a number of commonalities.

Hollywood and Dubai are parallel universes. Both are all about making money; neither is keen to make waves that aren't lucrative, such as, respectively, blockbuster movies and mind-boggling real estate ventures. Both are surreal places, existing within but functioning far outside prevailing cultural norms. Both are cities of outsiders, thriving and even dependent upon the skills of non-natives.

To be certain, both do have their politically aware, active and attention-getting activists, though Angelina Jolie may trip off tongues more readily than her UAE national counterpart.

Nevertheless, they much prefer their business and not their politics to be the star attraction.

Now, both are faced with an international, headline-grabbing imbroglio. Hollywood encounters a dogged attempt by knee-jerk pro-Israeli forces to undermine one Oscar contender, Steven Spielberg's Munich, and to change the provenance of another, Hani Abu Assad's Paradise Now. Dubai faces the ADL which denounced the deal because of the UAE's lingering economic boycott of Israel. Sympathetic websites and blogs pounced, reminding readers and the Bush Administration of its first-term policy of staunchly opposing such trade barriers.

Debilitating shortcomings

Spielberg should consider teaming up with Abu Assad after Sunday night's awards show and train their lens on the DP World drama. They are likely to uncover as many debilitating shortcomings in American politics and society as they discovered in Israel's and Palestine's.

Just as DP World's voluntary request for the 45 day security review, a brilliant public relations strategy (and a welcome respite for a beleaguered White House) was announced, Republican Senator Susan Collins, chairwoman of the Homeland Security Committee, revealed the Coast Guard's national security concerns. These pre-dated the final report from the Committee on Foreign Investment in the US, or CFIUS.

Now, CFIUS gets another go at clearing the sale that they just got finished approving, and are actively defending. No surprise, the review is a ruse. No sooner will it be done than many in Congress will cry foul and demand oversight, the right to nix the deal, and much more. Unless Dubai uses the next 45 days to engage in a grassroots campaign for American hearts and minds, opponents in Congress will find considerable public support for their lunacy.

Lacking a basic understanding

On February 27, CBS News found that 7 in 10 Americans and 58 per cent of Republicans are opposed to the transfer of operational control. Of course, though many networks have attempted to offer some basic information on US ports, most Americans still lack a basic understanding of what the sale really entails, or how these operations are currently managed and secured. So is it any wonder that they are sceptical about Dubai, a place that is far and foreign? Foreign direct investment? That's an unknown concept, and vaguely threatening.

Luring foreign capital is the last thing on the minds of Congressional Democrats. Led by the hard charging Hillary "Oval Office-bound" Clinton, they are seized by the prospect of defeating President George W. Bush on the very issue that got him re-elected: national security.

Only a few senior Republicans like John McCain are likely to stand up to the tidal wave of insanity. Fractious Republicans angered by Bush's strong-arm political tactics and uneasy with his bottom-basement approval ratings have remained adamantly opposed to the deal.

Democrats seem poised to steal the White House's rhetorical wizardry. Not only can they alliterate with ease (witness New Jersey Senator Frank Lautenberg's taunt at a recent rally, "We wouldn't transfer the title to the devil; we're not going to transfer it to Dubai,") they also took a page out of Dick Cheney's playbook.

Remember how, in the run-up to the Iraq war, the vice-president convinced most Americans that Saddam Hussain was complicit in 9/11? Democrats plan to use the same word association, Dubai-terrorists-9/11-Taliban, to maintain their newfound national security card.

Neither Spielberg nor Abu Assad could ask for better real-time drama. Or more dire long-term implications should hysterical xenophobia cause the sale fall through, or DP World to withdraw.

Unlike the 1980s, when similar anti-Japanese mania swept up lawmakers and led to various prohibitions on foreign ownership, America faces more robust competition for FDI. With India and China rapidly advancing, Bush's policies causing angst in various capitals, and America's deficit ballooning, the US can ill afford further erosion of trust and confidence among key investors.

On a more positive note, Hollywood is likely to weather the outcry from Israeli groups and even the Israeli government. Paradise Now will remain a contender for best foreign film. It's country of origin? The Academy is leaning towards "Palestinian Territories", but is that really so important? In 2002, Divine Intervention was denied entry as the Academy did not recognise "Palestine". Nothing politically has changed in the intervening four years. But socially and culturally, progress has been made. Paradise Now is in.

Alhamdulillah.

- Maggie Mitchell Salem is a political and communications consultant based in Washington, DC. Previously, she was director of communications at the Middle East Institute and a special assistant to former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright.