• The US is reevaluating its position regarding the Panama Canal amid increasing Chinese influence.
• President Donald Trump's threat to "take back" the canal has raised international eyebrows and concerns over possible military actions.
• Historically, the construction of the canal significantly impacted Black Caribbean communities, highlighting systemic inequality.
• China's involvement in Panama is viewed with suspicion in Washington, especially with strategic control at stake for both nations.
• Key figures in US politics are reassessing strategies to counter China's growing economic presence in Latin America.

The Panama Canal, a vital artery for global trade, is currently at the forefront of escalating US-China tensions, raising concerns about sovereignty and international relations. Recently, as President Donald Trump stated his intent to "take back" control of the canal in a speech, it sparked a wave of discussions about the implications this could have, not just for trade and commercial interests but also for geopolitical dynamics in the region. In a world where trade routes are pivotal to financial systems, the significance of the canal cannot be overstated. More than 40% of US container traffic, representing a staggering US$270 billion annually, transits through this waterway, making it a strategic asset for the United States. Trump’s claims about the canal primarily revolve around the notion that Panama has allegedly ceded control to China, with recent assertions drawing sharp rebukes from both the Chinese government and Panamanian President José Raúl Mulino. In some statements, Trump has suggested that China's increased involvement in projects related to the canal violates existing neutrality agreements established during the canal's handover to Panama, as outlined in treaties signed in the 1970s, which emphasized the importance of maintaining the waterway's neutral status. During a hearing before the Senate Commerce Committee, Federal Maritime Commission Chair Louis Sola noted the pressing need for the US to support American companies and counterbalance China's position in Panama. This was mirrored by the sentiments of Senator Ted Cruz, who claimed that Panama is unfairly granting access to Chinese companies in crucial contractual dealings, potentially undermining US interests. Such remarks highlight a bipartisan concern regarding China's growing economic influence not only in Latin America but in strategic locations worldwide that are critical to US trade and military operations. While discussions of military intervention were floated during these Senate hearings, some lawmakers warned against taking aggressive steps that could exacerbate tensions with Panama and spur further Chinese encroachment. Senator Andy Kim cautioned that heavy-handed rhetoric could backfire, damaging US-Panama relations and inadvertently bolstering China's standing in the region. This strategic caution is underscored by the complex historical context of the Panama Canal, a narrative that often glosses over the long-standing implications of U.S. imperialism. Historically, the construction of the Panama Canal came at a profound human cost, involving the deaths of thousands of workers, predominantly Black Caribbean laborers. The narratives surrounding the canal largely overlook the racial disparities entrenched within its construction, when up to 80% of the recorded fatalities were African-descended workers subjected to grave working conditions. Such historical injustices remind us of the legacy attached to this vital passage and pose challenges in interpreting contemporary claims to ownership and control. The involvement of Chinese firms in the region, particularly through investments in the canal's infrastructure, has further complicated the narrative. The presence of Hutchison Port Holdings, which operates key ports at either end of the canal, has stirred debate over whether these operations conflict with the treaties governing the canal's neutrality. Critics worry that further entrenchment by Beijing could undermine US access and interests if geopolitical tensions were to escalate, especially in the context of a potential conflict in Asia. Chinese engagements have escalated since Panama established diplomatic relations with China in 2017. This marked a turning point, coming alongside the canal's significant role in China's Belt and Road Initiative; consequently, the US view of Panama has shifted from a strategic ally to a potential zone of contention. Amidst these negotiations and geopolitical tensions, alongside the other pressing issues surrounding the canal, Secretary of State Marco Rubio is set to visit Panama, where discussions are expected to focus on immigration and deeper economic ties in the region. However, the overarching narrative will likely encompass concerns about the potential for Chinese encroachment in a historically significant territory for the United States. Both the historical and current contexts surrounding the Panama Canal reveal a complex interplay of power, influence, and responsibility that extends beyond mere control of a waterway. The decisions made in the coming days, months, and years will undoubtedly shape not only the future of US relations with Latin America but will also resonate throughout global geopolitics. For further details, visit the original articles from SCMP, Independent, SCMP, SCMP, India Times, and Los Angeles Times.