WASHINGTON — Sen. Daniel K. Inouye, D-Hawai'i, criticized the agreement, approved by the Bush administration, for an Arab government-owned company to take over operations at six major U.S. ports, asking if it meant "terrorists welcome" signs would be next.

The agreement allows Dubai Ports World, owned by the United Arab Emirates, to take over major terminal operations in Baltimore, Miami, New Jersey, New Orleans, New York and Philadelphia from Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Co., based in London.

It has raised concerns and criticisms among Democrats and Republicans about its impact on homeland security.

"I am amazed that an agency like the Department of Homeland Security, which once was so intensely sensitive to having the smallest of items — such as forks and spoons — go through airport metal detectors, is now most enthusiastically supporting this deal," Inouye said yesterday.

"Does this administration-approved takeover by a foreign entity mean we will be putting up signs at the ports ... that declare, 'terrorists welcome'?" said Inouye, the ranking Democrat on the Senate's Surface Transportation and Merchant Marine Subcommittee.

Inouye and Rep. Neil Abercrombie, D-Hawai'i, noted that two of the terrorists who attacked the World Trade Center and the Pentagon were from the United Arab Emirates and said the country's banks were used by al-Qaida before the Sept. 11 attacks.

The Bush administration has never made port security a priority in money or meeting deadlines for security issues, Inouye said.

"This most recent display of poor judgment is simply further evidence that the administration still does not take port security seriously," he said.

Abercrombie, a senior member of the House Armed Services Committee, also called on Bush to reverse the administration's approval of the agreement.

"No matter how friendly a foreign government is, national security assets like domestic airlines, shipping and seaports should be in the hands of U.S. citizens," Abercrombie said. "In any company, the owner is the one who ultimately calls the shots."

But Rep. Ed Case, D-Hawai'i, questioned whether the debate on the agreement was focused properly, saying the issue is not that a United Arab Emirates company is taking over from a British company.

Instead, the question should be whether foreign companies should be managing U.S. ports, Case said. If that is to be done, he said, then are the provisions to protect homeland security adequate?

"We have to remember that the U.A.E. is ... an ally of our country and a country that has been indispensable in terms of the war on terror," he said. "We've got to step back a little bit and tone down the hysteria and focus on the obvious, which is that our ports are a key homeland security issue."

Sen. Daniel Akaka, D-Hawai'i, said the agreement raised concerns and was disappointed the administration approved it without consulting Congress.

But Akaka, a member of the Senate homeland security committee, said he wanted to have more information before making a decision about the agreement.

"I am committed to the security of U.S. ports, which is especially critical in Hawai'i where we receive 98 percent of our imports via the sea," he said.

Reach Dennis Camire at dcamire@gns.gannett.com.