The debates regarding the Panama Canal have recently reignited geopolitical tensions, national sovereignty crises, and discussions on economic interests. Panama’s President, Jose Raul Mulino, has firmly opposed U.S. President Donald Trump’s statements regarding the possible control of the canal and has rejected the possibility of negotiating the Panama Canal with the United States. Trump’s unproven claims on that China controls the canal have caused diplomatic unease in the region. Mulino emphasizing that the canal is under Panama’s jurisdiction and administration, has stated that it is not open to any negotiations.
The 82-kilometer-long Panama Canal, which is of vital importance for global trade, was built by the United States in the early 20th century. The control of the canal was transferred to Panama in 1999 under the Torrijos-Carter Treaties, and Panama’s neutrality was guaranteed. Trump’s claims that China has a military presence in the canal zone and controls the canal’s operations have been strongly rejected by the Panamanian government. The administration of the canal is controlled by the Panama Canal Authority, which is an autonomous institution. Additionally, while some ports around the canal are operated by a Hong Kong-based company, other facilities are managed by firms originating from the United States, Singapore, and Taiwan.[1] This situation invalidates claims regarding China’s full control over the canal.
U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s visit to Panama highlights broader geopolitical risks in the region. A prominent figure in Latin American policies, Rubio plays a critical role in shaping Washington’s strategies toward the region. Rubio’s visit also aligns with the Trump administration’s goal of countering China’s growing influence in Latin America. The United States, particularly due to Chinese companies operating in strategic areas, expresses security concerns in the context of its economic relations and investments with Central American countries.[2]
Beyond the dispute over the Panama Canal, migration policies are also one of the fundamental issues shaping U.S.-Latin America relations. Rubio’s visit is considered part of a broader regional tour aimed at addressing migration and security concerns. The Trump administration has intensified deportation procedures by using military aircraft to accelerate the process of returning undocumented migrants to their home countries. This approach initially led to diplomatic tensions with Colombia, which had refused U.S. deportation flights but later agreed to accept its citizens on its own terms. The administration’s policy of restricting migration has sparked debates regarding agreements that require some Latin American countries to accept deported individuals under third-country status.
The Trump administration’s efforts to re-establish U.S. dominance in the Western Hemisphere have been met with various reactions. Some view the emphasis on migration control and economic pressure as a necessary strategy to curb illegal immigration and foreign influence, while others see it as a form of modern imperialism. Trump’s statements regarding the Panama Canal have increased concerns about Washington’s approach to sovereignty and diplomacy, drawing comparisons to the U.S.’s historical interventions in Latin America. Critics argue that such rhetoric could encourage geopolitical rivals like Russia and China and escalate global tensions.
China’s expanding economic influence in Latin America, particularly through infrastructure projects and economic agreements, is affecting geopolitical balances in the region. Many Central American countries, including Panama, have shifted their diplomatic recognition from Taiwan to Beijing in alignment with China’s “One China” policy. The U.S. has expressed that China’s growing presence in the region, especially if Chinese firms establish control over strategic transportation and energy infrastructure, could pose a national security threat. These concerns were raised also during Rubio’s Senate confirmation hearings, and he claimed that China’s influence in the canal zone could violate the neutrality conditions in U.S.-Panama agreements.
Despite the increasing tensions in the region, some analysts argue that there is room for a diplomatic solution.Diplomatic efforts can focus on ensuring fair and transparent economic practices while respecting Panama’s sovereignty rather than escalating tensions. The Panamanian government has reaffirmed its commitment to the rule of law by emphasizing that foreign investments must comply with national regulations. Following Trump’s accusations, the audit of payments made by the CK Hutchison company to the state is seen as an effort to maintain Panama’s independent governance.
In conclusion, debates over the Panama Canal emerge as a complex issue at the intersection of historical legacy, economic interests, and geopolitical rivalry. As the Trump administration seeks to reassert control over strategic assets in the Western Hemisphere, policies regarding migration and foreign investments are expected to remain key factors in regional tensions. In this process, Panama must keep a delicate balance between safeguarding its economic and diplomatic interests while preserving its sovereignty. The outcome of these tensions will not only influence the U.S.-Panama relations but also the general geopolitical structure of Latin America.
[1] Canal control off the table with Rubio, Panama president says, Reuters, https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/canal-control-off-table-with-rubio-panama-president-says-2025-01-30/ (Erişim Tarihi: 30.01.2025).
[2] Rubio to take up Trump’s Panama gambit, migration crusade in Latam visit, Reuters, https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/rubio-take-up-trumps-panama-gambit-migration-crusade-latam-visit-2025-01-30/ (Erişim Tarihi: 30.01.2025).
