Panama’s president has made it abundantly clear: there will be no negotiation regarding the Panama Canal. This firm stance, issued in advance of Senator Rubio’s visit, signals a potentially significant escalation in the ongoing tension between Panama and the United States. The president’s unwavering position leaves little room for compromise, suggesting a determination to resist any perceived pressure from the US.
The idea of the US taking over the canal is unrealistic. It’s a notion that only those lacking a sound grasp of geopolitical realities would seriously entertain. Any attempt to seize control would face significant logistical hurdles, not to mention provoking widespread international condemnation.… Continue reading
In response to concerns about Panama’s cooperation, Hegseth affirmed the U.S.’s right to ensure free and unfettered access to the Panama Canal, citing the neutrality treaty. He emphasized the President’s commitment to this principle and the Defense Department’s preparedness to act accordingly, though specifics remained undisclosed. Maintaining strategic uncertainty was highlighted as a key element of the approach. Ultimately, freedom of navigation will be ensured, with or without direct Defense Department involvement.
Read More
President Mulino firmly rejected any negotiation with the U.S. regarding Panama Canal ownership, stating definitively that the canal belongs to Panama. While acknowledging confusion surrounding China’s involvement in port management (separate from canal control), Mulino emphasized a desire for productive discussions with Secretary Rubio focusing on shared priorities like combating drug trafficking and migration. This visit follows President Trump’s repeated assertions that the U.S. should reclaim the canal, despite the 1977 treaty transferring control to Panama. Mulino hopes to use Rubio’s visit to dispel misunderstandings and foster closer cooperation.
Read More
Panama’s government has officially voiced its concerns to the United Nations regarding President Trump’s threats to seize control of the Panama Canal. Any use of force would represent a clear violation of international law, a point Panama is strongly emphasizing. The situation is generating significant anxiety within Panama, with some citizens believing Trump’s threats are mere posturing, expecting the issue to fade. However, a more pessimistic view prevails, rooted in the belief that Trump has harbored ambitions regarding the canal since before his presidency.
The Torrijos-Carter Treaty, a landmark agreement, is viewed by many Panamanians as a sacred pact that should not be unilaterally abrogated.… Continue reading
This article provides a comprehensive list of locations, encompassing all 50 US states, US territories, and select Canadian provinces. The inclusion of zip codes is implied, suggesting a database or directory is being described. This detailed geographic coverage highlights the broad scope of the project. The information presented likely serves as a reference for location-based data.
Read More
Russia’s warning to Trump about seizing the Panama Canal is certainly a curious development. It’s a situation that begs the question: why would Russia, embroiled in a costly and protracted conflict in Ukraine, even bother issuing such a warning? The obvious answer, at least at first glance, seems to be a simple tit-for-tat response. It mirrors the numerous instances where the West has condemned Russian actions, actions that Russia never actually took. This might just be a theatrical display of power, a calculated move to project an image of strength on the world stage.
Perhaps Putin is playing a game of reverse psychology.… Continue reading
Russia’s foreign ministry issued a statement urging respect for Panama’s sovereignty over the Panama Canal, warning against U.S. attempts to reclaim control through coercion. The statement emphasized the canal’s vital role as an international transit waterway and reiterated Russia’s commitment to its neutrality. This follows President Trump’s previous threat to assert U.S. control, a move that Panama firmly rejected. Approximately 40% of U.S. container ships utilize the canal, highlighting its significance to American trade.
Read More
Panama’s President Mulino vehemently rejected President Trump’s claim to “take back” the Panama Canal, asserting Panama’s unwavering sovereignty over the waterway, secured by the 1977 Torrijos-Carter Treaty. Trump’s assertion, made during his inaugural address, contradicts the treaty’s terms and disregards Panama’s decades-long responsible management of the canal. Mulino warned against any actions violating Panama’s sovereignty, emphasizing the country’s commitment to international law and dialogue. Trump’s statements have sparked international condemnation and raised concerns about potential conflict.
Read More
Despite President-elect Trump’s assertions, Panama Canal Administrator Ricaurte Vásquez confirmed the waterway remains under Panamanian control and open to all nations, rejecting claims of Chinese dominance and any potential US seizure. Vásquez emphasized the canal’s neutrality treaty, permitting only expedited passage for American warships, and highlighted the established, nondiscriminatory fee structure, which recently concluded a planned series of increases. He dismissed suggestions of US preferential treatment as leading to chaos, noting that current port operations involve various international entities, including US and Taiwanese companies. The canal’s continued operation, even during recent droughts and the COVID-19 pandemic, underscores Panama’s commitment to maintaining its vital role in global trade.
Read More
Trump’s talk of retaking the Panama Canal, once dismissed as mere bluster, has surprisingly materialized into a GOP-sponsored bill. This unexpected development raises significant questions about the party’s priorities and the potential consequences of such a bold, and arguably reckless, proposal.
The very idea of a bill aiming to reacquire the Panama Canal, based solely on the pronouncements of a single individual, seems almost surreal. It underscores a concerning trend within the GOP of prioritizing the whims of a particular leader over established foreign policy and international relations. The fact that this is even being considered in Congress reflects a level of political dysfunction that should worry anyone concerned about the stability of the United States’ position on the world stage.… Continue reading
Matt Underwood 
John Q. Hosedrinker