The Panama Canal has long been a symbol of U.S. power and influence in the Western Hemisphere. It has played a critical role in facilitating global trade, serving as the shortest route between the Pacific and Atlantic Oceans. Recently, former U.S. President Donald Trump has reignited discussions about controlling this key waterway, raising eyebrows in both the U.S. and the international community. In a provocative move, Trump not only threatened tariffs on China, Canada, and Mexico but also posted a satirical image on social media showing the United States adding Greenland, the Panama Canal, and Canada to an Amazon shopping cart. Was this simply a tongue-in-cheek comment or part of a larger, more strategic warning to China? And could Trump’s rhetoric signal a shift in U.S. policy towards the Panama Canal?
The Panama Canal is more than just a trade route; it’s a geopolitical chess piece.
The 82-kilometer-long waterway reduces the distance for shipping between the East and West coasts of the United States by thousands of kilometers. Before its construction, ships had to navigate the perilous Strait of Magellan, at the southern tip of South America, to get from one ocean to the other. By cutting down on both distance and time, the canal is vital not only for global trade but also for the U.S. military, which relies on it to move naval forces and equipment quickly between oceans in times of conflict.
In 2023, 75% of the cargo passing through the canal was destined for or originated in the United States. Additionally, with about 15,000 ships transiting the waterway annually, it remains one of the most crucial global trade routes. The significance of the canal for U.S. interests cannot be overstated, particularly in the context of great power competition with China.
Although the U.S. relinquished control of the Panama Canal to Panama in 1999, it remains a pivotal asset for both economic and military interests. However, China’s increasing involvement in Latin America-particularly in Panama-has raised concerns. In 2017, Panama broke diplomatic ties with Taiwan and established relations with China, a move that deepened China’s economic influence in the region.
China’s interests are not limited to diplomacy. The Chinese company, CK Hutchison Holdings, a subsidiary of Hong Kong-based Hutchison Whampoa, operates two ports on the canal’s Caribbean and Pacific entrances. While this does not equate to direct control of the canal itself, it does give China significant leverage over critical infrastructure. These ports handle goods that pass through the canal, linking China’s economic ambitions with the vital shipping route.
This growing Chinese presence in Panama raises a crucial question: What would happen if a military conflict broke out between the U.S. and China, particularly over Taiwan? Would Panama, now aligned with China, continue to honor its commitment to free and neutral access to the canal for all nations, as stipulated in the 1977 U.S.-Panama Treaty? Given Panama’s economic ties to China, there are growing concerns over whether it would remain neutral or align itself with Beijing in such a scenario.
Donald Trump’s recent comments about potentially “taking control” of the Panama Canal appear to be more than just a rhetorical flourish. Trump’s son, Eric Trump, posting the image of the United States adding Greenland, Panama, and Canada to an online shopping cart, could be seen as a veiled warning to China that the U.S. would not tolerate growing Chinese influence over the canal. By reminding the world of the U.S. historical control of the canal, Trump may be signaling a shift in U.S. policy-one that aims to reassert influence over this key waterway and prevent China from further solidifying its foothold in the region.
Trump’s remarks also come in the broader context of his foreign policy agenda, which has consistently prioritized countering Chinese influence. The potential of China using the canal for strategic purposes-whether to restrict U.S. access or leverage economic and military power-could explain why Trump is emphasizing the importance of control over this vital asset. The Canal could, in theory, become a tool of geopolitical leverage, especially in the event of a conflict in the Indo-Pacific region.
The U.S. military’s ability to swiftly deploy forces in the Pacific and Atlantic theaters would be severely hampered if China gained significant influence over the Panama Canal. If tensions with China were to escalate, particularly over Taiwan, the canal could become a critical choke point. Would Panama, in deference to China, allow U.S. naval ships to pass through the canal? Would the U.S. be able to rely on Panama to uphold its obligations under the 1977 treaty, which guarantees non-discriminatory access?
While it’s unlikely that Trump’s comments are meant to directly challenge Panama’s sovereignty over the canal, they do reflect the strategic importance the U.S. places on maintaining access to the waterway. In an era of increasing U.S.-China tensions, the question of whether the Panama Canal will remain open and neutral in a time of crisis is one that Washington cannot ignore.
Trump’s remarks about taking control of the Panama Canal, though likely tongue-in-cheek, reflect a growing concern within the U.S. over China’s increasing influence in the Western Hemisphere. With Chinese investments in critical infrastructure and Panama’s diplomatic pivot towards Beijing, the U.S. must carefully navigate its relationship with Panama while ensuring that its interests in the region, particularly access to the Panama Canal, are safeguarded. Whether or not Trump’s comment leads to any concrete policy changes, it serves as a reminder that the geopolitics of the Panama Canal continue to be a key element in the broader U.S.-China rivalry.
Translated from India’s state-owned DD News
