Trump’s Bold Threat to Take Back the Panama Canal: Strategic Military and Diplomatic Implications

The Panama Canal, a marvel of engineering and geopolitical significance, has once again found itself in the spotlight. This time, President-elect Donald Trump has hinted at a plan that sounds more like something out of a Tom Clancy novel than a presidential campaign promise: taking back control of the Panama Canal. While his statement has electrified his supporters, it has also sent ripples through military and diplomatic circles alike.

Let’s decipher what this means for U.S. military strategy, foreign policy, and the broader implications for the balance of power in the Western Hemisphere.

The Strategic Importance of the Panama Canal

The Panama Canal is more than a shortcut between the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans. It is a linchpin of global trade and a critical asset for military logistics. Completed in 1914, the canal was under U.S. control for most of the 20th century, symbolizing American engineering prowess and geopolitical dominance. But in 1999, the U.S. handed over control to Panama under the terms of the Torrijos-Carter Treaties, which were signed back in 1977.

Since then, the canal has remained a crucial artery for global commerce, handling nearly 6% of the world’s maritime trade. For the U.S. military, it’s a vital link for moving naval and logistical assets between the Pacific and Atlantic theaters—an advantage not lost on the Pentagon.

The once and future president believes, however, that relinquishing the canal to Panama was a mistake, and he suggested that regaining control was necessary to protect American interests and counter the growing influence of China in the region.

China’s Influence in Panama: A Growing Concern

China has increasingly invested in Panama over the past two decades, and its footprint near the canal has alarmed U.S. defense and foreign policy experts. Chinese state-owned companies manage ports on both ends of the canal, raising concerns about potential leverage over one of the world’s most strategic chokepoints.

Trump’s rhetoric centers on the idea that the canal could become a pawn in a broader geopolitical struggle. He’s not wrong. In a conflict scenario, China’s influence could complicate U.S. access to the canal, potentially forcing the Navy to take the long way around South America via Cape Horn.

The Trump camp is positioning this as a matter of national security, suggesting that American forces should ensure the canal remains open to U.S. interests. The underlying message is clear: The U.S. cannot afford to lose strategic access to a resource of this magnitude.

Military Considerations: Is This Feasible?

From a military standpoint, the idea of “taking back” the Panama Canal raises serious questions. Panama is a sovereign nation, and any action to assert control over the canal would likely be viewed as an act of aggression.

While the U.S. military is undoubtedly capable of executing such a plan, the cost—in both political and human terms—could be staggering. Hypothetically, it would likely involve deploying special operations forces to secure key points along the canal and significant follow-on support to maintain control. The Pentagon would also need to prepare for potential pushback from regional allies and adversaries.

Moreover, this kind of operation would require a justification under international law, which is unlikely to hold water. Most likely, U.S. allies in the Western Hemisphere would balk at such a move, further isolating America on the global stage. Let’s be clear: I really doubt that President Trump plans on using military force to retake the Panama Canal. I’m sure he would much prefer the Panamanians to simply return it to us if he deems it necessary. 

That said, there’s historical precedent for U.S. intervention in Panama. In 1989, Operation Just Cause saw American forces topple Manuel Noriega’s regime, citing threats to American lives and democracy. While Trump’s rhetoric stops short of advocating outright invasion, his words have evoked memories of that era.

Diplomatic Fallout: A Regional Domino Effect?

Trump’s comments have already strained U.S.-Panama relations. Panamanian President Laurentino Cortizo has called for calm but warned that any attempt to undermine Panama’s sovereignty would be met with resistance.

Other Latin American nations are watching closely. Many still harbor resentment over decades of U.S. interventions in the region, and a move on the Panama Canal could reignite anti-American sentiment. Nations like Brazil, Mexico, and Argentina—key regional powers—might see this as a justification to further distance themselves from Washington and align more closely with Beijing or Moscow.

The broader international community isn’t likely to sit idly by either. A U.S. move to reassert control over the canal could escalate tensions with China and Russia, both of whom would see this as a direct challenge to their interests.

President-Elect Donald J. Trump suggested in a Post earlier on Truth Social, that if Panama decides to act against American Cooperation and Interests, then he will demand that the Panama Canal is placed back under the Control of the United States. pic.twitter.com/LEJXNXlX0M

— OSINTdefender (@sentdefender) December 22, 2024

The Political Angle: Campaign Promise or Genuine Threat?

Trump’s statements about the Panama Canal could be chalked up to political bluster, designed to rally his base with visions of American strength and resolve. But even as a rhetorical device, it’s a risky, if not surprising, play.

If this threat is serious, it represents a major shift in U.S. foreign policy—one that prioritizes unilateral action over multilateral cooperation. Such a move could define not just Trump’s presidency but also America’s role in the world for years to come.

Final Thoughts

For well over 100 years, the Panama Canal has been an international symbol of geopolitical power and influence. Trump’s talk of “taking it back” reflects a broader debate about America’s place in an increasingly multipolar world.

From a military perspective, securing the canal is plausible but fraught with risks. Diplomatically, it’s a powder keg waiting to explode. And politically, it’s a gamble that could either galvanize Trump’s supporters or alienate key allies.

In the end, the question isn’t whether the U.S. can take back the Panama Canal. It’s whether the risks are worth it—and whether the nation of Panama will bow to the will of the United States or not.