Posted on 12/24/2024 12:40:02 PM PST by RoosterRedux
Trump made an economic argument along with his geopolitical one: “We’re being ripped off at the Panama Canal like we’re being ripped off everywhere else,” he told the audience as he denounced the increased fees billed to American shippers by the canal’s operators.
...
The first treaty obliged Panama to operate the canal neutrally, with nondiscriminatory pricing, and allowed the United States to defend it from any threat that might interfere with its neutrality.
The second treaty transferred full control to Panama effective on Dec. 31, 1999, without superseding the first treaty’s broad provision allowing for US defense of this crucial military and economic asset.
Yet despite the assurances in these agreements, the sad truth is the Panama Canal is already in the “wrong hands”: China’s.
In 1996, Panama made a 25-year agreement to outsource management of the canal’s two entry ports — Cristóbal on the Atlantic side and Balboa on the Pacific — to a subsidiary of Hutchison Whampoa, a Hong Kong-based shipping firm.
Technically, the deal seemed to violate the 1977 Panama-US treaties, which guaranteed Panamanian operational control and local security for the canal as well as ownership.
At that time, however, Hong Kong was still a British colony — and both Congress and the US Federal Maritime Commission determined that Hutchison’s operations were not a threat to American interests.
(Excerpt) Read more at msn.com ...
Another chess piece moves decisively...
Seems like the US failed on their side of the deal by granting and cozing up to Communist China with Most-Favored-Nation Status.
Any news article about the Panama Canal and Trump that doesn’t mention China in the title and opening paragraph goes right in the dumpster as it’s more misleading stories meant to spread propaganda.
Until Panama is certified as living up to its treaty obligations we could put a 400% tariff on them and anyone who’s used that Canal.
As I recall, it was President Clinton who made the Chinese takeover of the ports, at both ends of the Panama Canal, possible. He was also trying to lease the Long Beach Naval Shipyard to them as well. Luckily, the Long Beach deal fell through.
It seems highly unlikely any 1 or more Panamanians alive today could "oust" or even try to oust China.
China would not walk away from a $2.5b, 40 company investment like a responsible tenant. This might be a very "close to the center of the board" position. One wonders how capable and reliable our local intel assets are.
Mister Carter's gift.
Carter.
A little late to that epiphany.
“Carter”
Voting for Democrats have consequences, almost all
are bad.
More destruction from Carter who gave us the Department of Education and the Islamic Republic of Iran.
You can be assured they are DEI-compliant and always ask your pronoun.
Plus: helped to depose the Shah which brought in Islamic terror to that country; pardoned draft dodgers hiding out in Canada; brought in high fuel prices and high interest; put a 1% cap on raises; gave us that 55mph speed limit; the list goes on.
It is neither a US military or economic “asset”. It belongs to Panama.
It may be a Panamanian asset over which the US has certain rights, but I doubt the US has the will or the ability to enforce them, if they even exist.
How could Carter have prevented the Islamic Republic of Iran?
Nixon on down.
I lived through all of those horrible times. Ronald Regan was like Heaven opening wide!
I watched a documentary several weeks ago on how the US acquired the Canal Zone as well as the building of the canal. The understanding I got from that documentary is the Canal Zone was sovereign US territory.
Giving this away would be like giving away Puerto Rico, The Marianas or Guam. Yet that dumbass Carter did it. I recall when it was given away that a Chinese company got the contract to run it. This was just unbelievably stupid.
He could have supported the Shaw that we installed.
The “giveaway” of the Panama Canal zone is tied DIRECTLY to Jimmy Carter, who was author to about as much mischief as the US Government had engaged in since the days of FDR’s New Deal.
By today’s standards, maybe not so bad, but Jimmy certainly set the bar pretty low for subsequent Democrat regimes.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.