The Perennial 'Canal Grab' Playbook: Panama as a Geopolitical Pawn
The claim that China 'operates' or 'controls' the Panama Canal, which gained traction when former President Trump invoked it in his 2025 inauguration speech, is demonstrably false. The Panama Canal Authority, an autonomous agency of the Panamanian government, runs the canal. CK Hutchison, a Hong Kong-based company, manages two key container terminals (Cristobal and Balboa) at either end of the
canal under concessions, but these facilities do not grant operational control over the waterway itself. This distinction, often blurred, is crucial. First Instance: The Original 'Canal Threat' (Early 20th Century) The concept of 'control' over the Panama Canal has always been tied to US strategic interests. The very existence of the canal is predicated on US intervention. In 1903, the US actively
supported Panamanian separatists in their revolt against Colombia, purely to secure the rights to build and control the canal. The Hay-Bunau-Varilla Treaty, signed by a Panamanian envoy (Philippe-Jean Bunau-Varilla, a French citizen who had not lived in Panama for 17 years) just two hours after his appointment by the provisional Panamanian government, granted the US perpetual sovereignty over a
10-mile wide Canal Zone. This effectively made Panama a protectorate and initiated a century of direct US military and economic control over the most strategic chokepoint in the Western Hemisphere. The 'threat' then was European colonial powers; the 'solution' was US hegemony (Walter LaFeber, 'The Panama Canal: The Crisis in Historical Perspective,' 1989). Repetition: The Cold War and 'National