Trump Claims Panama Canal Progress With BlackRock Port Deal

Wed, 05 Mar 2025 18:07:58 GMT

Shortly after his inauguration, President Donald Trump said he wanted to have greater control and influence of the Panama Canal, saying: “We didn’t give it to China. We gave it to Panama, and we’re taking it back.”

On Tuesday, March 4, news came that U.S. firm BlackRock announced a deal to buy most of the $22.8 billion ports’ business of Hong Kong conglomerate CK Hutchison. Notably, this includes the Balboa and Cristobal ports at each end of the Panama Canal, and in all control over 43 ports in 23 countries.

Trump says this is a “reclaiming” of the canal by the U.S., but Joe Raul Mulino, Panama’s president, posted on X Wednesday morning saying the U.S. president was “once again lying… The Panama Canal is not in the process of being reclaimed ... the Canal is Panamanian and will continue to be Panamanian!”

Importantly, the Panama Canal has more than 12,000 ships travel through each year, and of those ships 70% are coming from or going to U.S. ports.

CK Hutchison co-managing director Frank Sixt said in a statement, “I would like to stress that the transaction is purely commercial in nature and wholly unrelated to recent political news reports concerning the Panama Ports.”

Soy Transportation Coalition executive director Mike Steenhoek says the two ports that are part of the BlackRock deal have been under scrutiny as potential avenues for Chinese influence in the operation of the canal.

“The Panama Canal is owned by the Republic of Panama, by the people of Panama,” he says.

Steenhoek points to coincidental timing relative to the Balboa and Cristobal ports.

“Hutchison got the original concession to operate these two ports in 1997,” he says. “That was the same year that the British turned over Hong Kong to the Chinese.”

He also notes the U.S. takes a serious interest in the infrastructure of the canal and its adjacent areas.

“An important detail of the treaty that turned over the canal to the Panamanians was that the canal must be operated in a neutral fashion in perpetuity, and if that neutrality is ever compromised, the U.S. military is justified in intervening,” Steenhoek says.

In February, Secretary of State Marco Rubio visited Panama to discuss any Chinese influence over the canal, which included the ports as well as a bridge under construction crossing over the canal. After Rubio’s visit with Mulino, Panama stopped the Chinese bridge, which is part of that country’s Belt and Road strategy to build roads, ports and railways for global market access. The Panama action was condemned by Beijing.

The BlackRock and CK Hutchison transaction must be approved by the government of Panama.

Why Trump Continues to Talk About Taking Control of Greenland, Panama Canal

Wed, 08 Jan 2025 18:10:33 GMT

President-elect Donald Trump has refused to rule out using military force to acquire Greenland and the Panama Canal, citing their importance to American economic and national security.

When a reporter pressed Trump to rule out economic or military coercion to gain control of Greenland and the Panama Canal, Trump said, “I’m not gonna commit to that. No. It might be that you’ll have to do something.” He added: “We need Greenland for national security purposes.”

Trump has long expressed interest in purchasing Greenland, a Danish territory, describing it as “absolutely necessary” for U.S. security. He also raised concerns over the Panama Canal, claiming its current operation by Chinese interests undermines American control of a critical trade route.

Trump took aim at Denmark, threatening the country with high tariffs as part of his push to bring Greenland under U.S. control.

Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen and Panamanian President José Raúl Mulino rebuffed Trump’s remarks, emphasizing their nations’ sovereignty. Greenland, which became self-ruling in 1979, remains staunchly opposed to any sale. Similarly, Mulino declared Panama’s control of the canal “non-negotiable.”

Of Note:
The king of Denmark has changed the royal coat of arms for the first time in more than 500 years to more prominently feature Greenland.

As global competition intensifies in the Arctic and strategic maritime zones, Trump’s comments signal a potential shift in U.S. foreign policy priorities.

Why Trump wants Greenland: Strategic Resources and Geopolitical Ambitions
President-elect Donald Trump’s renewed interest in Greenland reflects its growing strategic importance. Beyond its symbolic value, the world’s largest island offers critical rare earth minerals essential for defense, electronics, and renewable energy. These resources, coupled with Greenland’s Arctic location, present the U.S. an opportunity to counter China’s dominance in rare earth supplies and assert a stronger presence in a region increasingly accessible due to climate change.

Trump’s stance underscores U.S. strategic priorities in the Arctic, including military readiness, resource security, and diminishing reliance on Beijing. Though the idea of acquiring Greenland isn’t new — dating back to U.S. attempts in 1867 and 1946 — Trump’s bold approach reignites debates over Arctic sovereignty, environmental challenges, and international diplomacy.

Trump Proposes Renaming Gulf of Mexico to “Gulf of America.”
On Tuesday, Jan. 7, President-elect Donald Trump announced his intention to rename the Gulf of Mexico to the “Gulf of America” during a press conference at Mar-a-Lago. Trump described the proposed name change as “appropriate” and reflective of the U.S. role in the region, claiming, “We do most of the work there, and it’s ours.”

The announcement aligned with a broader critique of the Biden administration’s policies, including offshore drilling regulations. Trump also addressed Mexico’s immigration policies, threatened tariffs on Mexico and Canada, and reiterated past aspirations for U.S. territorial expansion, referencing Greenland and the Panama Canal.

Renaming an international body of water, however, would require consensus among bordering nations, including Mexico and Cuba, making unilateral action by the U.S. improbable. The proposal underscores Trump’s push for assertive rebranding of U.S. influence in the region.