Panama channel, the strategic axis in the middle of the competition

Matteo Francdor – Vatikan Ciodad

A strategic step for international trade; Punta technology. Panama channel, the main source of the income of the Central American country, is at the center of the conflict between the United States and China. Panama in the center, called for the balance of national economic interests, priorities and new US agreements with Beijing.

Trump’s goals

With his awareness of the second time in the White House, US President Donald Trump, who is already aware of his strong investment speech to work in global trade, demanded the power by complaining about excessive costs to pass American ships, despite the fact that there is a kind of priority for Washington’s trade.

Trump also complained about the alleged control of Beijing on the movement of ships that cross the Panama channel. Until 1999, it was the United States that controlled the channel, which is considered the jewel of the original engineering. Since then, the transfer of the administration has definitely moved to Panama after many changes and mixtures that periodically belong to the Media Care Center.

The high technology provided by the channel allows ships to save several hours of travel and fuel to move from the Atlantic Ocean to the Pacific Ocean. In recent years, some climatic conditions have caused complications due to dehydration, which reduced the number of ships during the crossing.

Trump relies on the history and path of events to demand the weight that the United States should cause on the channel. In one of the exits in which he spoke about this, the American president also threatened to use the military forces, but then confessed to unnecessary deployment of the forces.

Therefore, it is not a coincidence that Trump also accuses Beijing of direct control of the channel. “We presented it to Panama, but now it belongs to the Chinese,” he said at a conference.

The role of China and the latest events

Recent events, however, confirm a change. Since 2017, Beijing has created a series of commercial negotiations with Panama, which broke ties with Taiwan in the same year, to control two five ports adjacent to the channel.

Movement in the context of investments and projects Belt and Road InitiativeThe Chinese initiative announced by the Panamanian President, Jose Raul Mulino, in recent weeks that he has no intention of renewal.

Chinese company Hutchison Ports HoldingsThrough their participation in Panama Ports CompanyIn recent years, it has worked in Balbua Port, located on the Pacific Ocean side, and the Cristóbal port, which gives the Atlantic Ocean. Hutchison Ports Holdings, Therefore, the largest ports operator in the region was recently.

March 4, CK Hutchison He announced that he had agreed to sell some of the assets of the international ports to the investor’s investment, led by the investment company in New York Blackrock In a process valued at about 23,000 million dollars. Handing up CK Hutchison As evidence of Chinese control.

Strategic shock

Chinese newspaper Ta Kong Bao Described as “the act of submission and betrayal” decision CK Hutchison To sell your global ports to a consortium led by BlackrockIn claiming that the company sacrificed national interests for benefits. However, it was found that the agreement is an unexpected gain for the Chinese company CK HutchisonThis agreement is in Blackrock To pay much higher than the value of the port.

The company, which was directed by the billionaire in Hong Kong Li Ka Chiging, said that he received only more than nineteen billion dollars in cash for Panama’s operation, compared to an estimated value of about 10,000 from five hundred million dollars.

However, the celebration of Trump’s agreement as a victory for the United States in a speech a few days ago may encourage a national reaction by China.

Newspaper Ta Kong Bao The agreement on the Panama channel also described the “dominant coercion law”, equal that the “American” channel will help Washington at the expense of Chinese companies. A position that inevitably emphasized the strategic confrontation between them.