Trump Wants to Retake Panama Canal (Week 8/9 News Review)

Since USA President Donald J. Trump’s Inauguration, Trump’s been vocal about the U.S. re-taking control of the Panama Canal, including right-of-way entities.

Trump stated during his Address on March 4th to the Joint Session of Congress:

“To further enhance our National Security, my Administration will be Reclaiming the Panama Canal….We gave it to Panama. They gave it to China. Now they charge us to use it.”

Trump’s populist rhetoric, simplistic and flawed, is calculated to rabble-rouse the average under-educated American who readily believes anything their politicians tell them.

What will they get from the Panama Canal deal aside from possibly more inflation and higher grocery costs to subsidize the BlackRock asset-stripping of Panama and the building of new ships to “take over” the massive Chinese cargo ships? Will this be any different from the transnational asset-stripping underway in Ukraine, where the FTX scandal guaranteed that the taxpayers got the worse end of the stick: paying once for the war, twice for the corruption, and thrice for the unsentenced—who always hide their income so as to avoid paying U.S. taxes?

However since the Panama Canal was handed over to the country of Panama in 1999 under the Torrijos-Carter Treaty of 1977, it’s a political no-go. The Panama Canal has been under Panama’s control since before 2000, and the nation has expended billions of dollars in improvements ever since. A third set of locks was even approved and construction was completed by a European conglomerate in 2016. With channel widening, a third channel at least 60 feet deep was built to accommodate neo-Panamax ships. New plans by Panama include retrofitting the railroad, damming Rio Indio to combat water loss from the locks, drought, and evaporation.

Does the U.S. really believe it can now step-in like an absentee landlord? What right does one party have over Panama’s port contracts and expansion technologies?

Of course legally it’s a hot-button issue because the “re-takeover” is based on the protection-clause built into the Treaty. The threat is merely perceived at this point—no actual takeover or military threat has been posed—no violence or threat of such—except that China has been “too successful”; has built-in too much “over-capacity”; poses a “technological threat.” Obviously the USA wants to have its cake and eat it too—because the efficiency of China is its ages-old survivalism and competitiveness—and because of its efforts to clamp down on corruption.

In fact, the Trump Administration has acted so quickly, marching in double-time, since the ascendancy of Trump to the Office of President. BlackRock, probably by pre-arrangement, made phone-calls to the White House after the Joint Address, and is already in the process of buying a 90% stake in the Panama Ports Company, which operates the ports of Balboa (on the Pacific side) and Cristobal (on the Atlantic side) of the Canal. Both ports were largely owned by Hong Kong based firm CK Hutchison, even though part-owner billionaire entrepreneur Li Ka-Shing is a Hong Kong and Canadian citizen and Knight Commander of the Order of the British Empire (a title very rarely bestowed to Chinese gentlemen).

Absentee Landlord: Long Concluded Handover of Panama Canal to Panama

Over the past decades, the U.S. lost interest in Latin America mostly because of its focus on foreign wars and conflicts: Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Serbia, and Ukraine, to name just a few.

The intervening years had been fruitful for South America, relieved of Uncle Sam’s watchful eye, in forming strong regional alliances and economic trade and cooperation agreements. The exercise of formulating intergovernmental organizations (IGOs) is less about China than strategies for developing and maintaining Latin American independence, while brokering power. In fact for thousands of years, ancient civilizations in Latin America and Central America and up through Mexico were able to conduct trade and exert intracultural influences.

What changed was the emergence of the United States in North America as the presumed number one power-broker in the world, while veering away from diplomacy and into military economics. According to Singaporean international diplomat and author of “Has China Won?” Kishore Mahbubani, it is essential for America to entertain the possibility of a multilateral world in which it may be consigned to number two in the world to formulate new alternative tracks away from almighty militarism:

“If America is going to respond effectively to the new geopolitical challenge from China, it needs to make some massive U-turns, including cutting down its military expenditures, withdrawing from all military interventions in the Islamic world, and stepping up its diplomatic capabilities. Yet, powerful vested interests in America will make it impossible for America to make any of these sensible U-turns….There is no danger of America collapsing like the former Soviet Union. America is a much stronger country, blessed with great people, institutions, and many natural advantages. However, while America will not totally collapse, it can become greatly diminished, a shadow of itself.”

Essentially the more the United States demonizes other nations publicly, the more other nations will observe this process, back away, and resort to self-protective measures. The world has become too globalized and interconnected for nations to simply fall-in-line like during the 1950s. Today, many nations are willing to do what it takes to maintain and assert their independence, given that the dark history of U.S. interventionalism inside Latin America is written into their histories.

America’s pre-occupation with Eastern Europe and direct orchestration of proxy war with Russia has taken time and attention away from Latin America, but here is how U.S. used foreign military aid to promote global clout according to Andrei Akulov of Strategic Culture magazine:

“In the days of the Cold War, the United States never spared funds for arming and training militaries in Central America to serve U.S. strategic goals – in El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras and Nicaragua (before the 1979 Sandinista revolution). Washington supported the armed forces of brutal authoritarian governments only because they were anti-communist. The regimes murdered tens of thousands of their own citizens. Hundreds of human rights abusers have graduated from the School of Americas (Fort Benning, Ga.). They also attended the Command and General Staff College at Fort Leavenworth Kan., the John F. Kennedy Special Warfare Center and School at Fort Bragg, N.C., and the intelligence school at Fort Huachuca, Ariz. The servicemen were taught to fight internal enemy, which included civilian political opponents as well as armed guerrilla forces, no course on securing democratic institutions was offered. Nowadays, the U.S. policy called the Merida Initiative designed to ‘help the region’s militaries take on internal security roles’ is in force. Although the US denounced the 2009 military coup in Honduras, Wikileaks cables later revealed that the Obama administration had State Department officials meet with the illegitimate new Honduran ‘president’ to help coordinate the implementation of the Merida Initiative.” — “US Boosts Foreign Military Aid to Promote Global Clout“

U.S. meddling in Central and South America is not merely about politics; it involves covert trade, such as the “guns for drugs” exchanges with the Contras, exposed in the famous Oliver North Iran-Contra Trials of the late 1980s. Today it takes place via sophisticated human-trafficking networks essentially legitimized to enable “mass migration for drugs, child-labor-sex-organ-trafficking” as described by Ryan Matta in an interview with Stew Peters recently. In “Breaking: Secret Service, US Government Elites Caught Raping Kids in Guatemala,” Matta describes how US ambassadors, such as Todd Robinson, throw Diddy-style freak-out parties for fly-in power-brokers which involve kidnapping, child-rape, and even murder.

The phenomenon of migration, soft-power elite-partying, and shell companies nevertheless strikes a chord among bleeding-heart liberals. Ending War with Russia must be replaced by War with China and pundits are already bragging about the new Cold War with China. Nevermind that it doesn’t make sense: Were Canada, Mexico, and China to shut down exports to the U.S., America would be in economic chaos in days. We rely on the 37% imports from China; and the balance of trade mostly from Canada and Mexico. To determine which parts are manufactured in China also requires a separate budget and access to foreign industrial manufacturing sites by U.S. Dept of Commerce trade inspectors, further complicating relations.

This is why the new interest in the Panama Canal by the U.S.A. is sparking worries and concerns from China (number two user of the Panama Canal) as well as neighboring nations. Panama paid dearly for its independence: one of its early presidents, Manuel Noreiga became heavily compromised as a drug-turncoat-spy-us-puppet. Due to his activities becoming exposed, the U.S. wanted him to voluntarily resign in 1989. When he refused, the U.S. orchestrated a coup called “Operation Just Cause” in the dead of the night that resulted in over 500 people killed, and at least 3,000 wounded; in fact, some say the count of the dead was in the thousands.

Between 1989-1991, the economic toll was staggering for the small nation according to William Blum in “Killing Hope: US Military and CIA Interventions Since World War II“:

“Panamanian businessmen reported that they’d lost as much as $700 million because of the looting and rioting that followed the invasion, very little of it covered by insurance. One year after the invasion, unemployment was running at more than 25 percent, and invasion damage, looting, and the US sanctions of 1988-89 had shrunk Panama’s economy by 30 percent.” — Chapter 50. Panama 1969-1991, Killing Hope

A new puppet-president, Guillarmo Endara was secretly sworn in, but upheaval continued because the new regime persecuted and imprisoned thousands of former Noriega supporters, dissidents, and potential troublemakers. The new Council for Public Security and National Defense, an intelligence office, even received training from the CIA. The Panamanian Public Force, headed by a commander appointed by the United States, released numerous criminals from Panama’s prisons to make room for all the political prisoners. The result was an extraordinary wave of crime and violence and instability including assaults, murders, robberies, etc, much worse than anything under Noriega’s administration.

The Intervening Decades to be BlackRocked

The American public education system scarcely covers the history of Panama in its schoolbooks. Even civil engineers do not really learn about the inventions accompanying the Panama canal history and developments by American innovators whether it was the elimination of Yellow Fever, the steam-powered clam-shell excavator, hydropowered lock-systems, blasting techniques, balancing excavation-fill for the canal embankments, and railroad tow-away systems. This was aside from the efficient management of workers that allowed Carribeans the opportunity to travel, work, and save money. It was the experience and opportunity of a lifetime, just as the Rooseveltian New Deal had been for Dust-Bowl migrants.

The big question regarding the U.S. “re-taking” of Panama is whether it will honor and preserve Panamanian independence and Canal autonomy?

In fact, one of the greatest attractions to BRICS and the Belt-and-Road-Initiative (BRI) by China is that it is not “all about China.” The BRI’s greatest selling point is that it is an alternative to the oppressive hegemony of the IMF World Bank lending system which frequently imposes post-colonialist socio-political mandates written into the agreements.

The basis for all agreements crafted between host-country BRICS and the would-be participant, enables thorough planning, design, review, and vetting of tangible outcomes before a loan is processed by the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB). Thus, new railroad proposal alternatives might just as keenly be bid by Japan or South Korea as by China; and if the nation balks at how the construction is undertaken (such as separate housing facilities for Chinese engineers and workers) the leaders can point to an agreement stipulating healthy committment.

One-Belt-One-Road (OBOR) was actually the brainchild of American economist Lyndon LaRouche, now subsumed by the Schiller Institute, led by Dr. Helga Zepp-LaRouche. For decades Lyndon LaRouche traveled the globe opening dialogue about building economic trade corridors through creation of a global transnational transportation system. Many countries have worked on plans, but China took the lead when it experienced an economic rennaissance through its investment in the development of high-speed rail corridors first within China. A universal transportation network lowers energy costs, fosters supply-chain resource efficiency, and spurs local economic developments, particularly in underdeveloped nations.

Nations tap into the BRI because BRICS consultants work with their customers focusing on what is on their wish-list rather than what can be exploited, such as the Europeans had done for centuries. Recall English pirate Sir Henry Morgan, who sacked Panama City in 1671. Even if the “Sacking of Panama Viejo” was just part of the Anglo-Spanish War, the natives of the Isthmus of Panama were taken for granted, a pattern that continued throughout Central and Latin America, with much gold shipped to Europe and stored at Rothschild-like banks or reworked into precious engravings and crowns.

No wonder Panamanians are concerned about American political-cultural imperialism! 

In contrast, “China’s vision for a shared future and better world” envisages beneficial projects completed to empower sovereign nations and their peoples. For example, Bolivia just completed its first modern integrated steel plant with an annual production capacity of 200,000 tonnes. The plant creates thousands of jobs, while also supporting the development of a variety of local trade industries. Bolivian-China Ambassador Hugo Siles expressed his jubilation about the plant completion, that “the BRI provides a new solution for global development.” This latest project completion is one pearl in the showcase of projects on how BRI contributes to building a global community with a shared future for humanity.

“An increasing number of countries are actively contributing to building a community with a shared future for humanity. More than 100 countries support the Global Development Initiative (GDI), the Global Security Initiative and the Global Civilization Initiative, while over three-quarters of the world’s nations have joined the Belt and Road cooperation.” — CGTN

By comparison to China’s win-win humanistic-centered development, the Manifest Destiny-like hostile-takeover initiated by President Trump over Panama Canal will antagonize Panama and her people, let alone other nations which will now see an increase in U.S. troops and military personnel or Army Corps of Engineers operating in the Canal Zone.

Panamanian President Jose Raul Mulino was angered by President Trump’s claims about the Canal being operated by China, and his early reaction included:

“Once again, US President Trump is lying. The Panama Canal is not in the process of being reclaimed, and it is certainly not the task that was even discussed in our conversations with Secretary Rubio or anyone else,” said President Mulino.

Because Panama is a relatively small country and buffeted on its southern side by the deadly Darien Gap, through which hundreds of thousands of migrants have poured in transit to the United States from South America up through Central America, it is described as a country vascillating in the sway of whichever country or mega-corporation holds power and riches. This is a place for many offshore tax-havens and spy dens, such as uncovered by the Panama Papers leak by investigative journalists. Once the West bites back into Panama, a paradigm shift will take place, as already evident with Dr. Ricuarto Vasquez Morales’ recent reconnoiter of Tokyo, Japan soliciting trade, maritime, and energy sector partners. Japan is the third largest user of the Panama Canal, after the U.S. and China, in terms of volume. Think liquid petroleum gas (LPG), automobiles, electronics, and cargo reefers full of seafood or cryogenics.

However for Panamanians who derive a significant boost to the economy from Canal fees, cargo transfers, ship repairs, trade, and tourism, any proposed take-over is likely going to remain a huge issue politically inside the country, maybe even potentially destabilizing its current leadership. Bear in mind with the West, including Japan, BlackRock, or Israel, the cultural perspective can be quite different; one must adjust to ESG (environmental, social, governance) scores for instance, and take a certain amount of brow-beating or expectation, such as from U.S. Ambassadors, that they are co-equal with the top ruling class in the nation. There may even be attempts to rewrite local laws or restructure local networks.

This is why a cry-and-hue has been raised by various politicians and media pundits in China, with rumors that the Li family may now be under scrutiny by the government. Here is a quote from the press conference at the United Nations presided over by China Ambassador Fu Cong on February 4, 2025 in answer to a question from an Al Jazeera journalist:

“First, since this is directly related to China, let me say that I think the accusation against China is totally false, is groundless. Let me emphasize that China has not participated in the management and operation of the Panama Canal and has never interfered in the management and operation of the Panama Canal and has never interfered in Canal affairs. China respects Panama’s sovereignty of the Canal and recognizes the Canal as permanent, a neutral international gateway, so I want to put that on record.” — UN China Ambassador Fu Cong

Ambassador Cong went on to express his disappointment that Panama President Mulino has quit his country’s participation in the Belt-and-Road Initiative (BRI):

“I think this is a regrettable decision because the Belt and Road Initiative first, and let me say, this is an economic initiative. The purpose is to build up a platform for countries, especially the Global South, to have economic cooperation with each other. So it has nothing to do with any political agenda. And the economic cooperation is mutually beneficial, so we do hope that country would see this in the proper light.”

Ambassador Cong further wants to defend to BRI from the ongoing Western smear campaign that can undermine regional goodwill and ethical participation:

“And the smear campaign that is launched by the U.S. and some of the other Western countries on the Belt and Road Initiative is totally groundless, and so we will continue our efforts in the hope that the Global South can work better and China can provide the assistance to the development of all these developing countries.”

Ambassador Cong also later emphasized the many commonalities the U.S. and China share such that it makes sense to work together, take a constructive, and professional approach.

“There are so many things that we can work together and so much is at stake. If China and the U.S. can work together and jointly, I’m sure there are, we will be able to solve many problems and make the world a better place to live. And let me emphasize also that there is no winner in a Trade War. We are firmly opposed to this unwarranted increase and we do believe that this is in violation of the WTO Rules, so that’s why China is filing a complaint at the WTO, and we may be forced to take counter-measures.”

Panamanians May Resist American Militarization

A number of Panamanians including President Mulino are expressing concerns and reservations about the take-over. In fact, Panama even has Panamanian-Chinese settlers who have been in Panama for many decades, doing what Cantonese Chinese have done for centuries elsewhere, opening small businesses such as cafes and laundromats. CGTN interviewed a number of people on the ground, but here is another statement by President Jose Raul Mulino on February 21, 2025:

“I have instructed the Foreign Minister to categorically reject any false claims, such as the so-called Chinese intervention in the Canal if they appear on the agenda. We will not engage in discussions based on lies. It is absolutely absurd to fabricate claims about China controlling the Panama Canal out of a pathological mindset. In our dialogues with the United States, we are focused on advancing pragmatic bilateral cooperation, not on hearsay and conspiracy theories. If the U.S. side continues to spread such misinformation, dialogue between Panama and the U.S. will come to an end.” — President Jose Raul Mulino, February 21, 2025

The fact is that there will always people willing to become lapdogs for the United States, however, there were several Panamanian citizens sharing their concerns even as early as January 2025. Milena Marin, an environmentalist, believes that the Panama Canal belongs to all Panamanians, and since Panama had taken over its administration, they had done very well in taking care of it. Trump’s attacks are harmful, she believes, to the country’s brand, harmful to world peace, and raising too much negativity. Luis Caicedo, a street vendor, doesn’t think an American take-over is necessary because “we are living in an era where much progress has been made.” He favors a fruitful dialogue between the presidents to find a way forward and maintain peace in the region while maintaining the best possible perspective. For young Luis Gomez, a photographer, President Trump’s statements do not seem to make sense; Panama is a peaceful nation that does not even have a military, so how will they be able to confront the Americans?

“We are a neutral and sovereign territory. The impact would be so overwhelming for us. The Canal is a main economic asset not only for Panama, but for the world. The stability provided by the Canal allows the smooth flow of many ships from across the globe. Communication and review of the terms of the Treaty would be a better course of action to resolve everything peacefully. There is no need for war or escalation of conflict; it is in no one’s interest. Dialogue and negotiation, discussing the details and clarifying everything, would be the best thing for the region and our country. Maintaining our Treaty is vital for us. —CGTN, “We Talk: Panamanian Residents on Trump’s Ambitions for Panama Canal”

Mr. Gomez made much sense, even if to more seasoned politicians, the massive amounts of money flowing onto the table also matter. The debate is being heard from Hong Kong, to BeiJing, to Washington, to London, and of course throughout Panama. It’s a developing story with the anticipation of a BlackRock-led conglomerate to seal the deal with CK Hutchison to take control of 43 ports, including Port Cristobal and Port Balboa, by early April. Despite the resistance from BeiJing and Panama, nothing is appearing on the horizon to halt the deal.

Photo of Cocoli Locks, from Webcam @ https://multimedia.panama-canal.com/

Developing Story by Christine H. Kroll, P.E., M.A.