US President-elect Donald Trump has ignited controversy with remarks suggesting that the United States should consider demanding the return of the Panama Canal. Speaking at a recent event, Trump criticised the high tolls imposed by the Panama Canal Authority and expressed concerns over growing Chinese influence in Panama, which he argued could pose a strategic risk to US interests.

Panama’s President, José Raúl Mulino, swiftly rejected the remarks, calling the canal an integral part of Panama’s sovereignty. As this issue gains attention, it is worth exploring the history of the Panama Canal, its importance in global trade, and the implications of Trump’s proposal.

<h2>The History of the Panama Canal</h2>

The Panama Canal, completed in 1914, is one of the most significant engineering achievements in history. Stretching approximately 50 miles across the Isthmus of Panama, the canal connects the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans, dramatically reducing maritime travel times by eliminating the need to navigate around South America’s Cape Horn. This shortcut transformed global trade, enabling faster and more efficient movement of goods.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/panama-rubbishes-trumps-promise-to-take-control-of-canal-786198">Panama rubbishes Donald Trump's threat to take control of Canal</a>

The canal’s construction was originally attempted by French engineers in the late 19th century but failed due to financial mismanagement, engineering challenges, and deadly tropical diseases like malaria and yellow fever. In the early 20th century, the United States stepped in, purchasing the French assets and securing the rights to complete the canal.

The US&nbsp;role in the canal’s construction was closely tied to Panama’s independence from Colombia. In 1903, the US supported Panama’s bid for independence, and shortly after, the newly established Panamanian government signed the Hay-Bunau-Varilla Treaty, granting the US control over the canal zone in perpetuity. The canal opened in 1914, operated and maintained by the US, and became a cornerstone of American strategic and economic power.

<h2>The Struggle for Panamanian Sovereignty</h2>

While the canal was a point of pride for American engineering, it became a source of resentment in Panama. The canal zone, a US-controlled territory, created economic disparities and fuelled anti-American sentiment among Panamanians. Calls for sovereignty over the canal grew louder in the mid-20th century, culminating in the signing of the Torrijos-Carter Treaties in 1977.

These agreements, negotiated by US President Jimmy Carter and Panamanian leader Omar Torrijos, set a timeline for the gradual transfer of the canal to Panama. Over 22 years, control was handed over step by step, with Panama officially taking full ownership of the canal on December 31, 1999. Today, the Panama Canal is a vital economic asset for Panama, generating billions of dollars annually and serving as a symbol of national pride.

<h2>Trump’s Remarks and Panama’s Response</h2>

During his recent remarks, President-elect Trump criticised the tolls charged by the Panama Canal Authority, arguing that they disproportionately harm American businesses. He also raised concerns about Chinese investments in Panama, including infrastructure projects near the canal. These comments align with Trump’s broader “America First” philosophy, which prioritises US economic and strategic dominance.

Panama’s President José Raúl Mulino quickly responded, rejecting Trump’s comments as a challenge to Panamanian sovereignty. Mulino emphasised that the canal is a non-negotiable part of the country’s independence and identity. “The Panama Canal is ours. It represents our sovereignty and is not up for debate,” Mulino stated in an official press release.

Trump’s remarks highlight growing US concerns about China’s expanding presence in Latin America. Beijing has invested heavily in Panamanian infrastructure, including port facilities near the canal, as part of its broader Belt and Road Initiative. According to the Council on Foreign Relations, China is now one of Panama’s largest trading partners, sparking fears in Washington that Beijing’s economic influence could translate into strategic leverage.

Watch:&nbsp;Donald Trump Threatens to Reassert US Control Over Panama Canal

<iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/donald-trump-threatens-to-reassert-us-control-over-panama-canal-786102/embed" width="560"></iframe>

<h2>The Modern Role of the Panama Canal</h2>

The Panama Canal remains a critical artery for global commerce, facilitating the passage of approximately five per cent of the world’s maritime trade. Its strategic importance extends beyond economics, serving as a vital link in supply chains for goods ranging from oil to consumer electronics. For Panama, the canal is an economic lifeline, generating billions of dollars in revenue and supporting thousands of jobs.

In 2016, the canal underwent a $5.25 billion expansion, adding a third set of locks to accommodate larger ships, known as Neopanamax vessels. This upgrade has reinforced the canal’s relevance in a rapidly changing global trade landscape.

For the United States, the canal remains a strategic asset. While the Torrijos-Carter Treaties formalised the transfer of ownership, the canal’s efficient operation and neutrality are essential for US shipping and military logistics. However, China’s investments in Panama have added a layer of complexity to this dynamic, raising questions about the balance of power in the region.

Despite a significant decline in ship crossings due to water shortages and a sharp drop in rainfall in 2023, the Panama Canal saw a remarkable 15 per cent&nbsp;revenue increase to nearly $5 billion, buoyed by higher tolls and special auction fees that reached up to $4 million per passage, according to the New York Times.&nbsp;

The canal authority introduced significant toll increases before the water crisis, which helped offset the financial impact of reduced ship traffic caused by low water levels.&nbsp;

Shipping companies were willing to pay substantial sums, up to $4 million per passage, to secure one of the limited crossings. However, continued delays and rising costs may prompt shipping companies to explore alternative routes, such as the Suez Canal or circumnavigating Africa.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/trump-accuses-panama-of-ripping-off-the-us-with-excessive-fees-threatens-to-take-back-control-786029">Trump accuses Panama of 'ripping off' the US with excessive fees, threatens to take back control</a>

<h2>Legal and Diplomatic Challenges</h2>

Trump’s suggestion to demand the return of the Panama Canal faces significant legal and diplomatic obstacles. The Torrijos-Carter Treaties are internationally recognised agreements, and any attempt to renegotiate or reverse them could strain US-Latin American relations, which have already been tested in recent years.

Moreover, demanding the canal’s return risks alienating Panama, a key regional partner. Analysts argue that such rhetoric could push Panama closer to China, undermining US efforts to counter Beijing’s growing influence in the Western Hemisphere.

<h2>Geopolitical Implications</h2>

The Panama Canal’s importance goes beyond trade. In an era of heightened US-China competition, control of critical infrastructure like the canal has taken on new strategic significance. While Trump’s concerns about China’s investments are shared by many policymakers in Washington, experts caution that provocative demands could backfire, weakening US influence in Latin America.

Instead, analysts suggest that the US focus on strengthening partnerships with Panama and other Latin American nations. By investing in regional development and fostering economic ties, the US can counterbalance China’s presence without resorting to contentious demands.

<h2>Conclusion</h2>

The Panama Canal has become a symbol of sovereignty, cooperation, and global trade for Panama. While Donald Trump's remarks may resonate with many, any attempt to reclaim it would face significant opposition and risk destabilising US-Latin American relations. Ultimately, the US would need to carefully weigh whether reasserting control over the canal is worth the potential costs and consequences, considering the fragile balance of regional diplomacy and the canal's enduring importance in global commerce.

US President-elect Donald Trump has ignited controversy with remarks suggesting that the United States should consider demanding the return of the Panama Canal. Speaking at a recent event, Trump criticised the high tolls imposed by the Panama Canal Authority and expressed concerns over growing Chinese influence in Panama, which he argued could pose a strategic risk to US interests.

US President-elect Donald Trump has ignited controversy with remarks suggesting that the United States should consider demanding the return of the Panama Canal. Speaking at a recent event, Trump criticised the high tolls imposed by the Panama Canal Authority and expressed concerns over growing Chinese influence in Panama, which he argued could pose a strategic risk to US interests. Panama’s President, José Raúl Mulino, swiftly rejected the remarks, calling the canal an integral part of Panama’s sovereignty. As this issue gains attention, it is worth exploring the history of the Panama Canal, its importance in global trade, and the implications of Trump’s proposal. The History of the Panama Canal The Panama Canal, completed in 1914, is one of the most significant engineering achievements in history. Stretching approximately 50 miles across the Isthmus of Panama, the canal connects the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans, dramatically reducing maritime travel times by eliminating the need to navigate around South America’s Cape Horn. This shortcut transformed global trade, enabling faster and more efficient movement of goods. Also read | Panama rubbishes Donald Trump's threat to take control of Canal The canal’s construction was originally attempted by French engineers in the late 19th century but failed due to financial mismanagement, engineering challenges, and deadly tropical diseases like malaria and yellow fever. In the early 20th century, the United States stepped in, purchasing the French assets and securing the rights to complete the canal. The US role in the canal’s construction was closely tied to Panama’s independence from Colombia. In 1903, the US supported Panama’s bid for independence, and shortly after, the newly established Panamanian government signed the Hay-Bunau-Varilla Treaty, granting the US control over the canal zone in perpetuity. The canal opened in 1914, operated and maintained by the US, and became a cornerstone of American strategic and economic power. The Struggle for Panamanian Sovereignty While the canal was a point of pride for American engineering, it became a source of resentment in Panama. The canal zone, a US-controlled territory, created economic disparities and fuelled anti-American sentiment among Panamanians. Calls for sovereignty over the canal grew louder in the mid-20th century, culminating in the signing of the Torrijos-Carter Treaties in 1977. These agreements, negotiated by US President Jimmy Carter and Panamanian leader Omar Torrijos, set a timeline for the gradual transfer of the canal to Panama. Over 22 years, control was handed over step by step, with Panama officially taking full ownership of the canal on December 31, 1999. Today, the Panama Canal is a vital economic asset for Panama, generating billions of dollars annually and serving as a symbol of national pride. Trump’s Remarks and Panama’s Response During his recent remarks, President-elect Trump criticised the tolls charged by the Panama Canal Authority, arguing that they disproportionately harm American businesses. He also raised concerns about Chinese investments in Panama, including infrastructure projects near the canal. These comments align with Trump’s broader “America First” philosophy, which prioritises US economic and strategic dominance. Panama’s President José Raúl Mulino quickly responded, rejecting Trump’s comments as a challenge to Panamanian sovereignty. Mulino emphasised that the canal is a non-negotiable part of the country’s independence and identity. “The Panama Canal is ours. It represents our sovereignty and is not up for debate,” Mulino stated in an official press release. Trump’s remarks highlight growing US concerns about China’s expanding presence in Latin America. Beijing has invested heavily in Panamanian infrastructure, including port facilities near the canal, as part of its broader Belt and Road Initiative. According to the Council on Foreign Relations, China is now one of Panama’s largest trading partners, sparking fears in Washington that Beijing’s economic influence could translate into strategic leverage. Watch: Donald Trump Threatens to Reassert US Control Over Panama Canal The Modern Role of the Panama Canal The Panama Canal remains a critical artery for global commerce, facilitating the passage of approximately five per cent of the world’s maritime trade. Its strategic importance extends beyond economics, serving as a vital link in supply chains for goods ranging from oil to consumer electronics. For Panama, the canal is an economic lifeline, generating billions of dollars in revenue and supporting thousands of jobs. In 2016, the canal underwent a $5.25 billion expansion, adding a third set of locks to accommodate larger ships, known as Neopanamax vessels. This upgrade has reinforced the canal’s relevance in a rapidly changing global trade landscape. For the United States, the canal remains a strategic asset. While the Torrijos-Carter Treaties formalised the transfer of ownership, the canal’s efficient operation and neutrality are essential for US shipping and military logistics. However, China’s investments in Panama have added a layer of complexity to this dynamic, raising questions about the balance of power in the region. Despite a significant decline in ship crossings due to water shortages and a sharp drop in rainfall in 2023, the Panama Canal saw a remarkable 15 per cent revenue increase to nearly $5 billion, buoyed by higher tolls and special auction fees that reached up to $4 million per passage, according to the New York Times. The canal authority introduced significant toll increases before the water crisis, which helped offset the financial impact of reduced ship traffic caused by low water levels. Shipping companies were willing to pay substantial sums, up to $4 million per passage, to secure one of the limited crossings. However, continued delays and rising costs may prompt shipping companies to explore alternative routes, such as the Suez Canal or circumnavigating Africa. Also read | Trump accuses Panama of 'ripping off' the US with excessive fees, threatens to take back control Legal and Diplomatic Challenges Trump’s suggestion to demand the return of the Panama Canal faces significant legal and diplomatic obstacles. The Torrijos-Carter Treaties are internationally recognised agreements, and any attempt to renegotiate or reverse them could strain US-Latin American relations, which have already been tested in recent years. Moreover, demanding the canal’s return risks alienating Panama, a key regional partner. Analysts argue that such rhetoric could push Panama closer to China, undermining US efforts to counter Beijing’s growing influence in the Western Hemisphere. Geopolitical Implications The Panama Canal’s importance goes beyond trade. In an era of heightened US-China competition, control of critical infrastructure like the canal has taken on new strategic significance. While Trump’s concerns about China’s investments are shared by many policymakers in Washington, experts caution that provocative demands could backfire, weakening US influence in Latin America. Instead, analysts suggest that the US focus on strengthening partnerships with Panama and other Latin American nations. By investing in regional development and fostering economic ties, the US can counterbalance China’s presence without resorting to contentious demands. Conclusion The Panama Canal has become a symbol of sovereignty, cooperation, and global trade for Panama. While Donald Trump's remarks may resonate with many, any attempt to reclaim it would face significant opposition and risk destabilising US-Latin American relations. Ultimately, the US would need to carefully weigh whether reasserting control over the canal is worth the potential costs and consequences, considering the fragile balance of regional diplomacy and the canal's enduring importance in global commerce.

President-elect Trump threatens to demand return of Panama Canal: History and significance explained

New York, United States
US President-elect Donald Trump has ignited controversy with remarks suggesting that the United States should consider demanding the return of the Panama Canal. Speaking at a recent event, Trump criticised the high tolls imposed by the Panama Canal Authority and expressed concerns over growing Chinese influence in Panama, which he argued could pose a strategic risk to US interests.
Panama’s President, José Raúl Mulino, swiftly rejected the remarks, calling the canal an integral part of Panama’s sovereignty. As this issue gains attention, it is worth exploring the history of the Panama Canal, its importance in global trade, and the implications of Trump’s proposal.
<h2>The History of the Panama Canal</h2>
The Panama Canal, completed in 1914, is one of the most significant engineering achievements in history. Stretching approximately 50 miles across the Isthmus of Panama, the canal connects the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans, dramatically reducing maritime travel times by eliminating the need to navigate around South America’s Cape Horn. This shortcut transformed global trade, enabling faster and more efficient movement of goods.
Also read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/panama-rubbishes-trumps-promise-to-take-control-of-canal-786198">Panama rubbishes Donald Trump's threat to take control of Canal</a>
The canal’s construction was originally attempted by French engineers in the late 19th century but failed due to financial mismanagement, engineering challenges, and deadly tropical diseases like malaria and yellow fever. In the early 20th century, the United States stepped in, purchasing the French assets and securing the rights to complete the canal.
The US role in the canal’s construction was closely tied to Panama’s independence from Colombia. In 1903, the US supported Panama’s bid for independence, and shortly after, the newly established Panamanian government signed the Hay-Bunau-Varilla Treaty, granting the US control over the canal zone in perpetuity. The canal opened in 1914, operated and maintained by the US, and became a cornerstone of American strategic and economic power.
<h2>The Struggle for Panamanian Sovereignty</h2>
While the canal was a point of pride for American engineering, it became a source of resentment in Panama. The canal zone, a US-controlled territory, created economic disparities and fuelled anti-American sentiment among Panamanians. Calls for sovereignty over the canal grew louder in the mid-20th century, culminating in the signing of the Torrijos-Carter Treaties in 1977.
These agreements, negotiated by US President Jimmy Carter and Panamanian leader Omar Torrijos, set a timeline for the gradual transfer of the canal to Panama. Over 22 years, control was handed over step by step, with Panama officially taking full ownership of the canal on December 31, 1999. Today, the Panama Canal is a vital economic asset for Panama, generating billions of dollars annually and serving as a symbol of national pride.
<h2>Trump’s Remarks and Panama’s Response</h2>
During his recent remarks, President-elect Trump criticised the tolls charged by the Panama Canal Authority, arguing that they disproportionately harm American businesses. He also raised concerns about Chinese investments in Panama, including infrastructure projects near the canal. These comments align with Trump’s broader “America First” philosophy, which prioritises US economic and strategic dominance.
Panama’s President José Raúl Mulino quickly responded, rejecting Trump’s comments as a challenge to Panamanian sovereignty. Mulino emphasised that the canal is a non-negotiable part of the country’s independence and identity. “The Panama Canal is ours. It represents our sovereignty and is not up for debate,” Mulino stated in an official press release.
Trump’s remarks highlight growing US concerns about China’s expanding presence in Latin America. Beijing has invested heavily in Panamanian infrastructure, including port facilities near the canal, as part of its broader Belt and Road Initiative. According to the Council on Foreign Relations, China is now one of Panama’s largest trading partners, sparking fears in Washington that Beijing’s economic influence could translate into strategic leverage.
Watch: Donald Trump Threatens to Reassert US Control Over Panama Canal
<iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://cdn.thepublive.com/wion/static/kaltura_player/wion_video_player_iframe.html?thumbnail=wion/media/post_attachments/files/2024/12/23/2312_panama_930am-1734930610-00000003.jpg&videourl=https://vodakm.zeenews.com/vod/WION/2312_panama_930am.mp4/index.m3u8&duration=195&tags=Donald Trump,US,Panama,Panama canal" width="560"></iframe>
<h2>The Modern Role of the Panama Canal</h2>
The Panama Canal remains a critical artery for global commerce, facilitating the passage of approximately five per cent of the world’s maritime trade. Its strategic importance extends beyond economics, serving as a vital link in supply chains for goods ranging from oil to consumer electronics. For Panama, the canal is an economic lifeline, generating billions of dollars in revenue and supporting thousands of jobs.
In 2016, the canal underwent a $5.25 billion expansion, adding a third set of locks to accommodate larger ships, known as Neopanamax vessels. This upgrade has reinforced the canal’s relevance in a rapidly changing global trade landscape.
For the United States, the canal remains a strategic asset. While the Torrijos-Carter Treaties formalised the transfer of ownership, the canal’s efficient operation and neutrality are essential for US shipping and military logistics. However, China’s investments in Panama have added a layer of complexity to this dynamic, raising questions about the balance of power in the region.
Despite a significant decline in ship crossings due to water shortages and a sharp drop in rainfall in 2023, the Panama Canal saw a remarkable 15 per cent revenue increase to nearly $5 billion, buoyed by higher tolls and special auction fees that reached up to $4 million per passage, according to the New York Times. 
The canal authority introduced significant toll increases before the water crisis, which helped offset the financial impact of reduced ship traffic caused by low water levels. 
Shipping companies were willing to pay substantial sums, up to $4 million per passage, to secure one of the limited crossings. However, continued delays and rising costs may prompt shipping companies to explore alternative routes, such as the Suez Canal or circumnavigating Africa.
Also read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/trump-accuses-panama-of-ripping-off-the-us-with-excessive-fees-threatens-to-take-back-control-786029">Trump accuses Panama of 'ripping off' the US with excessive fees, threatens to take back control</a>
<h2>Legal and Diplomatic Challenges</h2>
Trump’s suggestion to demand the return of the Panama Canal faces significant legal and diplomatic obstacles. The Torrijos-Carter Treaties are internationally recognised agreements, and any attempt to renegotiate or reverse them could strain US-Latin American relations, which have already been tested in recent years.
Moreover, demanding the canal’s return risks alienating Panama, a key regional partner. Analysts argue that such rhetoric could push Panama closer to China, undermining US efforts to counter Beijing’s growing influence in the Western Hemisphere.
<h2>Geopolitical Implications</h2>
The Panama Canal’s importance goes beyond trade. In an era of heightened US-China competition, control of critical infrastructure like the canal has taken on new strategic significance. While Trump’s concerns about China’s investments are shared by many policymakers in Washington, experts caution that provocative demands could backfire, weakening US influence in Latin America.
Instead, analysts suggest that the US focus on strengthening partnerships with Panama and other Latin American nations. By investing in regional development and fostering economic ties, the US can counterbalance China’s presence without resorting to contentious demands.
<h2>Conclusion</h2>
The Panama Canal has become a symbol of sovereignty, cooperation, and global trade for Panama. While Donald Trump's remarks may resonate with many, any attempt to reclaim it would face significant opposition and risk destabilising US-Latin American relations. Ultimately, the US would need to carefully weigh whether reasserting control over the canal is worth the potential costs and consequences, considering the fragile balance of regional diplomacy and the canal's enduring importance in global commerce.

As this issue gains attention, it is worth exploring the history of the Panama Canal, its importance in global trade, and the implications of Trump’s proposal



New York, United States US President-elect Donald Trump has ignited controversy with remarks suggesting that the United States should consider demanding the return of the Panama Canal. Speaking at a recent event, Trump criticised the high tolls imposed by the Panama Canal Authority and expressed concerns over growing Chinese influence in Panama, which he argued could pose a strategic risk to US interests. Panama’s President, José Raúl Mulino, swiftly rejected the remarks, calling the canal an integral part of Panama’s sovereignty. As this issue gains attention, it is worth exploring the history of the Panama Canal, its importance in global trade, and the implications of Trump’s proposal. The History of the Panama Canal The Panama Canal, completed in 1914, is one of the most significant engineering achievements in history. Stretching approximately 50 miles across the Isthmus of Panama, the canal connects the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans, dramatically reducing maritime travel times by eliminating the need to navigate around South America’s Cape Horn. This shortcut transformed global trade, enabling faster and more efficient movement of goods. Also read | Panama rubbishes Donald Trump's threat to take control of Canal The canal’s construction was originally attempted by French engineers in the late 19th century but failed due to financial mismanagement, engineering challenges, and deadly tropical diseases like malaria and yellow fever. In the early 20th century, the United States stepped in, purchasing the French assets and securing the rights to complete the canal. The US role in the canal’s construction was closely tied to Panama’s independence from Colombia. In 1903, the US supported Panama’s bid for independence, and shortly after, the newly established Panamanian government signed the Hay-Bunau-Varilla Treaty, granting the US control over the canal zone in perpetuity. The canal opened in 1914, operated and maintained by the US, and became a cornerstone of American strategic and economic power. The Struggle for Panamanian Sovereignty While the canal was a point of pride for American engineering, it became a source of resentment in Panama. The canal zone, a US-controlled territory, created economic disparities and fuelled anti-American sentiment among Panamanians. Calls for sovereignty over the canal grew louder in the mid-20th century, culminating in the signing of the Torrijos-Carter Treaties in 1977. These agreements, negotiated by US President Jimmy Carter and Panamanian leader Omar Torrijos, set a timeline for the gradual transfer of the canal to Panama. Over 22 years, control was handed over step by step, with Panama officially taking full ownership of the canal on December 31, 1999. Today, the Panama Canal is a vital economic asset for Panama, generating billions of dollars annually and serving as a symbol of national pride. Trump’s Remarks and Panama’s Response During his recent remarks, President-elect Trump criticised the tolls charged by the Panama Canal Authority, arguing that they disproportionately harm American businesses. He also raised concerns about Chinese investments in Panama, including infrastructure projects near the canal. These comments align with Trump’s broader “America First” philosophy, which prioritises US economic and strategic dominance. Panama’s President José Raúl Mulino quickly responded, rejecting Trump’s comments as a challenge to Panamanian sovereignty. Mulino emphasised that the canal is a non-negotiable part of the country’s independence and identity. “The Panama Canal is ours. It represents our sovereignty and is not up for debate,” Mulino stated in an official press release. Trump’s remarks highlight growing US concerns about China’s expanding presence in Latin America. Beijing has invested heavily in Panamanian infrastructure, including port facilities near the canal, as part of its broader Belt and Road Initiative. According to the Council on Foreign Relations, China is now one of Panama’s largest trading partners, sparking fears in Washington that Beijing’s economic influence could translate into strategic leverage. Watch: Donald Trump Threatens to Reassert US Control Over Panama Canal The Modern Role of the Panama Canal The Panama Canal remains a critical artery for global commerce, facilitating the passage of approximately five per cent of the world’s maritime trade. Its strategic importance extends beyond economics, serving as a vital link in supply chains for goods ranging from oil to consumer electronics. For Panama, the canal is an economic lifeline, generating billions of dollars in revenue and supporting thousands of jobs. In 2016, the canal underwent a $5.25 billion expansion, adding a third set of locks to accommodate larger ships, known as Neopanamax vessels. This upgrade has reinforced the canal’s relevance in a rapidly changing global trade landscape. For the United States, the canal remains a strategic asset. While the Torrijos-Carter Treaties formalised the transfer of ownership, the canal’s efficient operation and neutrality are essential for US shipping and military logistics. However, China’s investments in Panama have added a layer of complexity to this dynamic, raising questions about the balance of power in the region. Despite a significant decline in ship crossings due to water shortages and a sharp drop in rainfall in 2023, the Panama Canal saw a remarkable 15 per cent revenue increase to nearly $5 billion, buoyed by higher tolls and special auction fees that reached up to $4 million per passage, according to the New York Times. The canal authority introduced significant toll increases before the water crisis, which helped offset the financial impact of reduced ship traffic caused by low water levels. Shipping companies were willing to pay substantial sums, up to $4 million per passage, to secure one of the limited crossings. However, continued delays and rising costs may prompt shipping companies to explore alternative routes, such as the Suez Canal or circumnavigating Africa. Also read | Trump accuses Panama of 'ripping off' the US with excessive fees, threatens to take back control Legal and Diplomatic Challenges Trump’s suggestion to demand the return of the Panama Canal faces significant legal and diplomatic obstacles. The Torrijos-Carter Treaties are internationally recognised agreements, and any attempt to renegotiate or reverse them could strain US-Latin American relations, which have already been tested in recent years. Moreover, demanding the canal’s return risks alienating Panama, a key regional partner. Analysts argue that such rhetoric could push Panama closer to China, undermining US efforts to counter Beijing’s growing influence in the Western Hemisphere. Geopolitical Implications The Panama Canal’s importance goes beyond trade. In an era of heightened US-China competition, control of critical infrastructure like the canal has taken on new strategic significance. While Trump’s concerns about China’s investments are shared by many policymakers in Washington, experts caution that provocative demands could backfire, weakening US influence in Latin America. Instead, analysts suggest that the US focus on strengthening partnerships with Panama and other Latin American nations. By investing in regional development and fostering economic ties, the US can counterbalance China’s presence without resorting to contentious demands. Conclusion The Panama Canal has become a symbol of sovereignty, cooperation, and global trade for Panama. While Donald Trump's remarks may resonate with many, any attempt to reclaim it would face significant opposition and risk destabilising US-Latin American relations. Ultimately, the US would need to carefully weigh whether reasserting control over the canal is worth the potential costs and consequences, considering the fragile balance of regional diplomacy and the canal's enduring importance in global commerce.

A week after climate change denier Donald Trump&#39;s election to the White House, world leaders will on Tuesday address a key UN meeting in Marrakesh to keep a climate rescue plan on track.&nbsp;

UN chief Ban Ki-moon, King Mohammed of conference host Morocco, and France&#39;s President Francois Hollande will open a &quot;high-level&quot; segment of the annual UN forum, the first since last year&#39;s adoption of the Paris Agreement to stave off calamitous global warming.

This will be followed by speeches from nearly 60 heads of state and government from mainly African countries, but also some from Europe and several island states.

&quot;We expect of the heads of state to reiterate their commitment (to the deal)... and send a strong message to Trump and the rest of the world,&quot; Celia Gautier of the Climate Action Network, a grouping of NGOs, told AFP on Monday.

The election of Trump, who has called climate change a &quot;hoax&quot; and has threatened to &quot;cancel&quot; the Paris pact, has been uppermost on the minds of many delegates and negotiators gathered since last Monday to thrash out a roadmap for putting the agreement into action.

The hard-fought deal set an objective of limiting average global warming to two degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) over pre-Industrial Revolution levels by cutting planet-heating greenhouse gases from burning coal, oil, and gas.

Many fear that withdrawal by the United States, a champion of the deal under Barack Obama, would shatter the political goodwill built up over years of negotiations, and put the very planet-saving goals of the deal at risk.&nbsp;

While waiting for news from Washington, many now look to the rest of the world to strongly restate their commitment to the pact -- with or without the US.

All eyes will be on Marrakesh, where 39 kings and presidents and 18 prime ministers are scheduled to address the 22nd Conference of Parties (COP22 for short) of the UN&#39;s climate convention, which gathers 196 nations and the EU bloc.

Call to action&nbsp;

To date, 109 of the 197 parties have officially ratified the Paris Agreement, which entered into force on November 4 after crossing the threshold of 55 ratifications by countries representing 55 percent of greenhouse gas emissions.

They included the United States, which represents about 14 percent of global emissions, and China which accounts for 25 percent.

Beijing&#39;s climate envoy Xie Zhenhua stressed Monday that tackling climate was a &quot;common and shared responsibility&quot;.

&quot;International cooperation is a must for us to address climate change,&quot; he said in Marrakesh.

In Marrakesh, developing nations have been pushing for stronger finance commitments from the developed world, particularly for infrastructure to help them better cope with climate change-induced harms.

Scientists say warming over 2 degrees&nbsp;Celsius will yield dangerous sea level rise, harsher storms, and droughts, disease spread and conflict over ever-scarcer resources.

&quot;Now, more than ever, governments meeting in Marrakesh must commit to action to protect millions of vulnerable people from climate change,&quot; said Oxfam, which fights for poor people&#39;s interests at the climate talks.

Among the speakers on Tuesday&#39;s agenda are Sudan&#39;s Omar al-Bashir, for whom the International Criminal Court has issued an arrest warrant for war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide in Darfur.

Approached for comment, the UNFCCC said by email on Monday Bashir was invited by Morocco, which is not a party to the court&#39;s founding Rome Statute.

&quot;If even al-Bashir can contribute to the global climate effort, then President-elect Donald Trump will have no excuse,&quot; commented climate activist Mohamed Adow of ChristianAid.

(AFP)

World leaders will address a key UN meeting in Marrakesh on Tuesday, try and keep the Paris Agreement on track.?

A week after climate change denier Donald Trump's election to the White House, world leaders will on Tuesday address a key UN meeting in Marrakesh to keep a climate rescue plan on track. UN chief Ban Ki-moon, King Mohammed of conference host Morocco, and France's President Francois Hollande will open a "high-level" segment of the annual UN forum, the first since last year's adoption of the Paris Agreement to stave off calamitous global warming. This will be followed by speeches from nearly 60 heads of state and government from mainly African countries, but also some from Europe and several island states. "We expect of the heads of state to reiterate their commitment (to the deal)... and send a strong message to Trump and the rest of the world," Celia Gautier of the Climate Action Network, a grouping of NGOs, told AFP on Monday. The election of Trump, who has called climate change a "hoax" and has threatened to "cancel" the Paris pact, has been uppermost on the minds of many delegates and negotiators gathered since last Monday to thrash out a roadmap for putting the agreement into action. The hard-fought deal set an objective of limiting average global warming to two degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) over pre-Industrial Revolution levels by cutting planet-heating greenhouse gases from burning coal, oil, and gas. Many fear that withdrawal by the United States, a champion of the deal under Barack Obama, would shatter the political goodwill built up over years of negotiations, and put the very planet-saving goals of the deal at risk. While waiting for news from Washington, many now look to the rest of the world to strongly restate their commitment to the pact -- with or without the US. All eyes will be on Marrakesh, where 39 kings and presidents and 18 prime ministers are scheduled to address the 22nd Conference of Parties (COP22 for short) of the UN's climate convention, which gathers 196 nations and the EU bloc. Call to action To date, 109 of the 197 parties have officially ratified the Paris Agreement, which entered into force on November 4 after crossing the threshold of 55 ratifications by countries representing 55 percent of greenhouse gas emissions. They included the United States, which represents about 14 percent of global emissions, and China which accounts for 25 percent. Beijing's climate envoy Xie Zhenhua stressed Monday that tackling climate was a "common and shared responsibility". "International cooperation is a must for us to address climate change," he said in Marrakesh. In Marrakesh, developing nations have been pushing for stronger finance commitments from the developed world, particularly for infrastructure to help them better cope with climate change-induced harms. Scientists say warming over 2 degrees Celsius will yield dangerous sea level rise, harsher storms, and droughts, disease spread and conflict over ever-scarcer resources. "Now, more than ever, governments meeting in Marrakesh must commit to action to protect millions of vulnerable people from climate change," said Oxfam, which fights for poor people's interests at the climate talks. Among the speakers on Tuesday's agenda are Sudan's Omar al-Bashir, for whom the International Criminal Court has issued an arrest warrant for war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide in Darfur. Approached for comment, the UNFCCC said by email on Monday Bashir was invited by Morocco, which is not a party to the court's founding Rome Statute. "If even al-Bashir can contribute to the global climate effort, then President-elect Donald Trump will have no excuse," commented climate activist Mohamed Adow of ChristianAid. (AFP)

Under Trump shadow, world leaders tackle climate change

US President-elect Donald Trump put Mike Pence in charge of White House transition team along with three of his five children and son-in-law.&nbsp;

Christie will continue as vice chair of the transition effort and was left out as he copes with the &#39;Bridgegate&#39; lane closure scandal.&nbsp;

The announcement was made after a meeting at Trump Tower in New York City as Trump&#39;s aides begin the process of selecting candidates for some of the 4,000 jobs.&nbsp;

Trump&#39;s eldest daughter Ivanka and her husband Jared Kushner, along with sons Eric and Donald Jr. will look into the transition process while managing his business empire.&nbsp;

The business mogul&#39;s company said this will not breach conflict-of-interest laws.&nbsp;

New candidates emerge

Rudy Giuliani, former New York mayor is now a favourite for the position of Attorney General, which Christie was earlier considered for.&nbsp;

Giuliani said he was happy to advise Trump but did not comment if he would take the position.&nbsp;

&quot;I can see already how he is going to be a great president and I&#39;m glad I could play a small role in it,&quot; he said.&nbsp;

Since Trump&#39;s surprise win over Democrat nominee and rival Hillary Clinton, candidates such as Sarah Palin, David Malpass, former state department official are open to joining his administration.&nbsp;

According to Trump aides, Reince Priebus, Republican National Committee chairman and Steve Bannon, the campaign&#39;s CEO are the top contenders for White House chief of staff.&nbsp;

Trump does not have a lot of options, as many Republicans fiercely opposed and condemned his policies and comments.&nbsp;

He will most likely choose his strongest supporters for the important positions and according to campaign sources, Alabama senator, Jeff Sessions could be considered for defense secretary, Newt Gingrich as secretary of state and retired General Michael Flynn as national security adviser.&nbsp;

&nbsp;

(WION with inputs from Reuters)

New Jersey governor Chris Christie was dropped by president-elect Trump as he deals with the 'Bridgegate' lane closure scandal

US President-elect Donald Trump put Mike Pence in charge of White House transition team along with three of his five children and son-in-law. Christie will continue as vice chair of the transition effort and was left out as he copes with the 'Bridgegate' lane closure scandal. The announcement was made after a meeting at Trump Tower in New York City as Trump's aides begin the process of selecting candidates for some of the 4,000 jobs. Trump's eldest daughter Ivanka and her husband Jared Kushner, along with sons Eric and Donald Jr. will look into the transition process while managing his business empire. The business mogul's company said this will not breach conflict-of-interest laws. New candidates emerge Rudy Giuliani, former New York mayor is now a favourite for the position of Attorney General, which Christie was earlier considered for. Giuliani said he was happy to advise Trump but did not comment if he would take the position. "I can see already how he is going to be a great president and I'm glad I could play a small role in it," he said. Since Trump's surprise win over Democrat nominee and rival Hillary Clinton, candidates such as Sarah Palin, David Malpass, former state department official are open to joining his administration. According to Trump aides, Reince Priebus, Republican National Committee chairman and Steve Bannon, the campaign's CEO are the top contenders for White House chief of staff. Trump does not have a lot of options, as many Republicans fiercely opposed and condemned his policies and comments. He will most likely choose his strongest supporters for the important positions and according to campaign sources, Alabama senator, Jeff Sessions could be considered for defense secretary, Newt Gingrich as secretary of state and retired General Michael Flynn as national security adviser. (WION with inputs from Reuters)

Trump puts Pence in charge of transition team

Build a wall, make nice with Moscow, tear up free trade deals and force Washington&#39;s allies to pay more for their own security. OK, and then what?&nbsp;

Beyond a few broad isolationist and protectionist strokes, President-elect Donald Trump has not painted a detailed picture of his foreign policy.&nbsp;

Now, with just ten weeks until he takes command of the world&#39;s sole superpower, Washington&#39;s friends and foes are seeking clues to his agenda.

And if it seems vague, perhaps that&#39;s intentional. In speech after campaign speech, Trump insisted on the virtue of &quot;the element of surprise&quot;.

In January, Trump was asked whether as president he would bomb Iran&#39;s nuclear sites instead of relying on a negotiated deal to keep them mothballed.

&quot;I want to be unpredictable,&quot; Trump said, insisting that US voters&#39; would support, as they eventually did, his shoot-from-the-hip style.

In the closing stages of his presidential campaign, Trump repeatedly mocked the ongoing US-backed Iraqi campaign to liberate the city of Mosul.

Why had President Barack Obama&#39;s generals flagged up the siege four months in advance, giving the Islamic State group warning on the assault?

&quot;What a group of losers we have,&quot; he said on Saturday, as Iraqi and Kurdish forces backed by US advisers and air power closed in on the city.

&quot;We need different thinking in this country, folks. They should have kept their mouths shut.&quot;

Generals might argue that building a coalition while preparing supply lines and refugee reception areas could not have been carried out in the dark.

Hardline rhetoric

But Trump is adamant, citing his experience negotiating property deals and luxury branding, that being unpredictable can be a plus.&nbsp;

&quot;He doesn&#39;t have a foreign policy track-record to explore,&quot; wrote former CIA and NSA director Michael Hayden wrote for online journal The Cipher Brief.

&quot;So that leaves pretty much the campaign rhetoric to rely on. And campaign rhetoric historically gets softened by the realities of office.&quot;&nbsp;

Trump&#39;s rhetoric is certainly aggressive.&nbsp;

This time last year, his prescription for the Islamic States was simple: &quot;I would bomb the shit out of them. I&#39;d just bomb those suckers.&quot;

But he is not a neoconservative, with grand plans to remake the world in America&#39;s image through military adventurism and coercive diplomacy.

Despite evidence that he supported it at the time, Trump insists that former president George W&nbsp;Bush&#39;s invasion of Iraq was a terrible mistake.

He has touted a form of great power politics, &quot;making deals&quot; with US rivals to unite against threats like &quot;radical Islamic extremism.&quot;

&quot;Wouldn&#39;t it be nice if we actually got along with Russia and China and all these countries?&quot; Trump said in January. &quot;Wouldn&#39;t it be nice?&quot;

Allies like Japan, South Korea, Saudi Arabia and European NATO members will have to pay their way, however, Trump has no time for free riders.

Climate &#39;hoax&#39;&nbsp;

Trump&#39;s presidency will apparently be much more skeptical of free trade, believing export powers like China are stealing American jobs and capital.

He has threatened to tear up existing deals like the North American Free Trade Area, forcing Mexico to pay export tariffs to pay for his border wall.&nbsp;

He would drive a hard bargain in talks on trans-Atlantic and trans-Pacific trade deals, and take China to task for alleged currency manipulation.

Trump has also made noises about reauthorising US agents to use torture that have spread concern among allies and intelligence leaders themselves.

Last year, the United States and around 180 countries signed a landmark deal to slow climate change, an idea Trump has dubbed &quot;a hoax.&quot;&nbsp;

Iran has expressed concern that he would try to make good on a threat to rip up the nuclear agreement it signed last year with six world powers.

And Syrian refugees may no longer find safe haven in the United States, Trump having deemed them too great a risk of extremist violence.

In short, almost all of Nobel peace laureate Obama&#39;s foreign policy legacy is at risk, even his successful effort to normalize ties with communist Cuba.

But, once in the White House and advised by the National Security Council, State Department and US Trade Representative will Trump follow through?

Who knows? He&#39;s unpredictable.

(AFP)

Nobody really knows. His usual answer is, 'I want to be unpredictable'

Build a wall, make nice with Moscow, tear up free trade deals and force Washington's allies to pay more for their own security. OK, and then what? Beyond a few broad isolationist and protectionist strokes, President-elect Donald Trump has not painted a detailed picture of his foreign policy. Now, with just ten weeks until he takes command of the world's sole superpower, Washington's friends and foes are seeking clues to his agenda. And if it seems vague, perhaps that's intentional. In speech after campaign speech, Trump insisted on the virtue of "the element of surprise". In January, Trump was asked whether as president he would bomb Iran's nuclear sites instead of relying on a negotiated deal to keep them mothballed. "I want to be unpredictable," Trump said, insisting that US voters' would support, as they eventually did, his shoot-from-the-hip style. In the closing stages of his presidential campaign, Trump repeatedly mocked the ongoing US-backed Iraqi campaign to liberate the city of Mosul. Why had President Barack Obama's generals flagged up the siege four months in advance, giving the Islamic State group warning on the assault? "What a group of losers we have," he said on Saturday, as Iraqi and Kurdish forces backed by US advisers and air power closed in on the city. "We need different thinking in this country, folks. They should have kept their mouths shut." Generals might argue that building a coalition while preparing supply lines and refugee reception areas could not have been carried out in the dark. Hardline rhetoric But Trump is adamant, citing his experience negotiating property deals and luxury branding, that being unpredictable can be a plus. "He doesn't have a foreign policy track-record to explore," wrote former CIA and NSA director Michael Hayden wrote for online journal The Cipher Brief. "So that leaves pretty much the campaign rhetoric to rely on. And campaign rhetoric historically gets softened by the realities of office." Trump's rhetoric is certainly aggressive. This time last year, his prescription for the Islamic States was simple: "I would bomb the shit out of them. I'd just bomb those suckers." But he is not a neoconservative, with grand plans to remake the world in America's image through military adventurism and coercive diplomacy. Despite evidence that he supported it at the time, Trump insists that former president George W Bush's invasion of Iraq was a terrible mistake. He has touted a form of great power politics, "making deals" with US rivals to unite against threats like "radical Islamic extremism." "Wouldn't it be nice if we actually got along with Russia and China and all these countries?" Trump said in January. "Wouldn't it be nice?" Allies like Japan, South Korea, Saudi Arabia and European NATO members will have to pay their way, however, Trump has no time for free riders. Climate 'hoax' Trump's presidency will apparently be much more skeptical of free trade, believing export powers like China are stealing American jobs and capital. He has threatened to tear up existing deals like the North American Free Trade Area, forcing Mexico to pay export tariffs to pay for his border wall. He would drive a hard bargain in talks on trans-Atlantic and trans-Pacific trade deals, and take China to task for alleged currency manipulation. Trump has also made noises about reauthorising US agents to use torture that have spread concern among allies and intelligence leaders themselves. Last year, the United States and around 180 countries signed a landmark deal to slow climate change, an idea Trump has dubbed "a hoax." Iran has expressed concern that he would try to make good on a threat to rip up the nuclear agreement it signed last year with six world powers. And Syrian refugees may no longer find safe haven in the United States, Trump having deemed them too great a risk of extremist violence. In short, almost all of Nobel peace laureate Obama's foreign policy legacy is at risk, even his successful effort to normalize ties with communist Cuba. But, once in the White House and advised by the National Security Council, State Department and US Trade Representative will Trump follow through? Who knows? He's unpredictable. (AFP)

Trump: What exactly will the new president do?