Trump Threatens to Use Military to take Control of Panama Canal
Trump Claims China Controls Panama Canal
The leader of the Panama Canal Authority, Ricaurte Vásquez Morales, refuted President-elect Donald Trump’s claims that China controls the Panama Canal and dismissed the suggestion that U.S. ships should receive preferential rates. These claims were called unfounded and against international law. The Panama Canal is operated by the Panama Canal Authority, a Panamanian state entity, with no Chinese involvement in its operations. Trump’s statements about a $3 billion repair request and higher fees for U.S. ships were also denied.
The reality is that the canal is controlled by the Panamanian Canal Authority (PCA) according to the 1997 Diplomatic Treaty signed by Panama and the US under Jimmy Carter. This treaty mandates that all counties are allowed to use if for peaceful transit without discrimination aganinst any country. The US still maintains the right to intervene under the 1997 Diplomatic Treaty if the canal fell under Chinese control for example. However, taking over the canal is another matter legally.
Trump reference to control by the Chinese is in fact the Hong-Kong based Hutchison Whampoa company that won the bidding for two of the leases and operates a terminal on each end. In addition the other terminals are operated on long-term leases by Seattle-based SSA Marine, PSA Singapore, and Taiwan-based Evergreen Marine.
Key Points:
- Trump claimed China controls the Panama Canal and called for U.S. ships to have preferential rates.
- The Panama Canal Authority denied these claims, stating China has no operational role.
- Preferential treatment for any country would violate neutrality treaties and international law.
- Claims of a $3 billion U.S. repair request and higher fees for U.S. ships were refuted.
- Tolls for the canal are determined by ship size and type, with no exceptions based on nationality.
Reactions and Implications:
The statements made by Trump sparked reactions both within Panama and internationally. Many experts and officials emphasized the importance of maintaining the neutrality and independence of the Panama Canal, which is critical for global trade. The canal serves as a vital shortcut for maritime traffic between the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans, and its efficient operation is crucial for international shipping.
Ricaurte Vásquez Morales, along with other officials, reiterated the canal’s commitment to upholding international treaties, including the 1977 Torrijos-Carter Treaties, which ensure the canal’s neutrality and its operation by Panama. These treaties also guarantee that ships from all nations receive equal treatment when passing through the canal.
The international community, particularly countries reliant on the canal for trade, closely monitored the situation. Ensuring that the canal remains a neutral and unbiased passageway is of paramount importance to maintain global economic stability. Any suggestion of preferential treatment or altered control of the canal could have broad implications for international trade relations.
Conclusion:
The Panama Canal Authority’s firm response highlights the importance of factual accuracy and respect for international agreements in diplomatic discourse. The canal’s role as a neutral and independent entity continues to be a cornerstone of its operations, ensuring fair access to all nations and underpinning its significance in global maritime commerce.
