The first is related to the purpose of the control

In these times of economic patriotism, where each considers that, if economic giants, it is better to be they national, Americans will have the opportunity to demonstrate how they reconcile liberalism and protection of strategic interests. After the buyout of us by Dubai Ports World Corporation ports, the question of whether the agreement between Lucent Technologies, and Alcatel will meet the requirements of American national security risk to go beyond the simple review of the provisions of the Act American Exon-Florio on the control of foreign investment. Indeed, if the control operated by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the US, CFIUS, seems to have been correctly addressed by the protagonists, three factors of uncertainty weighing on this operation.

The first is related to the purpose of the control. The focus of the investigation conducted by the CFIUS is whether the transaction could have adverse consequences on the national security of the United States; This last is intentionally not defined previously. Without being arbitrary, the assessment criteria have been significantly modified since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. Telecoms are now regarded as a vital infrastructure, it is not uncommon that the authorization given to the foreign investor is now conditioned to the signing of a Network Security Agreement (NSA) imposing such accessibility of the federal authorities thus acquired American networks. Despite the precautions needed Lucent to isolate sensitive activities in a U.S. entity, there is no indication that the remaining activities will not be considered as critical infrastructure for which the United States would be entitled to block investment.

The second contingency is the timing of the operation. If the Exon-Florio review official procedure is strictly framed within a maximum period of 90 days, the process begins in reality catches of informal contact preceding the operation. Alcatel and Lucent have announced that the operation would be effective in the next six to nine months without however when they intended to officially notify their application for leave. This offset should be now reduced to the shortest, the Exon-Florio is obviously not the calendar market.

The third uncertainty relates to the institutional context. The Congress currently leads a reflection on the scope of the Exon-Florio device which leads him to think such that national security is defined too narrowly. The Banking Committee of the Senate has proposed on 28 February last to reflect on the means to fight against the detention of a part of the investor capital of the company by a foreign Government. Bipartisan legislation must be filed by the end of the year. It should not be that the Lucent-Alcatel approximation is the point of crystallization of this reform. There is a risk because the resentments born for the France in recent years, the "french bashing", are not fully dissipated despite the work of effective influence of France in the United States Ambassador, initiator of French Caucus to relay our interests to the Congress. The arrival of Alcatel has a symbolic meaning which must be well measured.

The lifting of uncertainty is the necessary prerequisite to the success of an operation for which the United States, too happy to return to us our address on economic patriotism, will be able to show that their commitment to the freedom to invest is not a pretexting as one of their national champion is involved.