Beyond Greenland, US President Donald Trump has also set his sights on acquiring the Panama Canal on the grounds of national security. He has similarly refused to rule out economic or military coercion to this end.
The 80km international waterway effectively provides a shipping shortcut between the Atlantic and Pacific oceans, allowing vessels to avoid the lengthy, dangerous voyage around the southern tip of South America.
Trump has accused Panama of charging excessive rates to use the Central American passage while also alleging, without basis, that China is involved in its management and that Chinese soldiers operate the canal.
“It’s being operated by China. China! We gave the Panama Canal to Panama, we didn’t give it to China,” Trump said in a freewheeling press conference at his Mar-a-Lago resort on Jan 7.
Trump doubled down on his assertions in his presidential inauguration speech on Jan 20. “China is operating the Panama Canal, and we didn’t give it to China, we gave it to Panama, and we’re taking it back,” he said.
China does not control or administer the Panama Canal, although a subsidiary of Hong Kong-based CK Hutchison Holdings has long managed two ports on both ends of the waterway.
Panama leaders have pushed back strongly on Trump’s threat to retake the key global waterway, which the US had built and owned before handing over control in 1999.
China has also weighed in. “China will as always respect Panama’s sovereignty over the canal and recognise the canal as a permanently neutral international waterway,” said a Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson in late December.
Trump’s remarks have stirred controversy and hinted at the aggressive foreign policy he is expected to take during his second presidency.
Analysts say the chances of the Trump 2.0 administration taking the Panama Canal by force are unlikely.
The US position in Latin America would be severely undermined if Trump were to proceed, cautioned Amalendu Misra, a professor of international politics at Lancaster University.
It would prompt many nations in the region to pull out from the Organisation of American States, which comprises more than 30 countries in the Americas, cautioned Misra in an article published by independent news site The Conversation on Jan 9.
“Worse still, it could also encourage many of the fearful nations to openly seek military alliances with enemies of the US, such as Russia, China and Iran – an outcome that would far from strengthen US security,” he said.
Either way, Trump’s expansionist rhetoric has already wrought harm to America’s reputation, said Gideon Rachman, chief foreign affairs columnist for the Financial Times.
“Even if Trump never makes good on his threats, he has already done enormous damage to America’s global standing and to its alliance system,” Rachman said in a Jan 15 commentary on CNA.
“Any sniggering at Trump’s ‘jokes’ is misplaced. What we are witnessing is a tragedy – not a comedy.”
