Paths for Expansion*
Published in Izvestia
(Russia) on 23 December 2024
by Tigran Meloyan (link to original)
(Russia) on 23 December 2024
by Tigran Meloyan (link to original)
Translated from
by Artem Belov.
Edited by Laurence Bouvard.
*Editor’s note: On March 4, 2022, Russia enacted a law that criminalizes public opposition to, or independent news reporting about, the war in Ukraine. The law makes it a crime to call the war a “war” rather than a “special military operation” on social media or in a news article or broadcast. The law is understood to penalize any language that “discredits” Russia’s use of its military in Ukraine, calls for sanctions or protests Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. It punishes anyone found to spread “false information” about the invasion with up to 15 years in prison.
An analyst at the Higher School of Economics, Tigran Meloyan – on why Donald Trump suddenly revived the idea controlling the Panama Canal and Greenland.
U.S. President-elect Donald Trump has turned his attention to one of the most important global transport arteries – the Panama Canal – having threatened to retake control. One can understand Trump’s remarks as being a message to two recipients – Panama and China. In the case of Panama, we’re talking about it raising the tariffs for the passage of American vessels. In the case of China, Trump finds it unacceptable for the canal to fall into the “wrong hands” and stray “under the influence” of Beijing.
Washington has many reasons for concern. According to data from the Council on Foreign Relations, Chinese state companies own stock in approximately 100 ports in 64 countries across the world, in all oceans and on all continents, excluding Antarctica, and Beijing definitely doesn’t plan to stop there.
Territorial claims are not something new for the Republican leader. This month he also made direct claims to Canada, which he said could join the U.S. as the 51st state, and laid claim to Greenland, the largest island in the world, offering to buy it from Denmark.
Trump’s rhetoric is a vivid example of how an American leader, in the post-colonial era, tends to threaten sovereign countries into handing all or part of their territory to the United States for control,
Trump’s messages about possibly “returning” the Panama Canal to U.S. jurisdiction take on a certain logic if you look at the developing world situation through the eyes of Americans. Against the developing struggle with China, which is expected to intensify when Trump takes office, it’s vital for the U.S. to ensure control over the most crucial waterways.
The U.S. currently feels uneasy in Panama, the Arctic Ocean and even less so in the Red Sea, where Houthi missiles pose a direct threat to commercial vessels and U.S. Navy ships.
Moreover, the Panama Canal is not just highly valuable to Washington, it is also of strategic importance, both economically and in terms of military strategy. This waterway plays a major role in the development of the global and U.S. economies. After the canal was commissioned, it cut the sea route from New York to San Francisco 14,000 to 6,000 miles, while the route from the East Coast of the U.S. to Asia became 10 days shorter than through the Suez Canal.
It’s also definitely worth noting that in 2022, about one-fourth of American liquefied natural gas supplies passed through the Panama Canal to the Asian markets — Japan, South Korea, China, India. With a growing demand for liquefied natural gas in Asia, a trend that will likely continue in 2025, both American supplies and American attention to the canal will only increase.
Under U.S. control, the Panama Canal could provide passage for U.S. military ships from the Pacific to the Atlantic and back, but bar Chinese or Russian ships by creating artificial obstacles under one pretext or another.
When 39th President Jimmy Carter signed the Torrijos-Carter Treaties in 1977 giving Panama control over the canal, he was hardly guided by the interests of his country. The transfer of the canal to Panamanian jurisdiction took place 25 years ago, in 1999. In general, Carter is spoken of as a failed head of state who achieved his greatest success after leaving office. His term as president, among other things, suffered from economic stagflation, the “loss” of Nicaragua, the breakdown of diplomatic relations with Iran, and a range of serious domestic political crises.
As for Trump’s “territorial expansion” into Greenland, which is claimed by Denmark, the future president asserts that U.S. control over the island should be ensured for national security purposes and for “freedom throughout the world.”
Greenland already plays a crucial role in U.S. defense because it is home to the Pituffik Space Base, which provides missile warning systems, missile defense, and space observation. If required, the base could host war planes, including F-35s.
American leaders have suggested purchasing Greenland before. President Harry Truman offered to buy Greenland for $100 million. Trump, as president, showed interest in the island back in 2019, which strained relations between Washington and Copenhagen.
As such, the picture is clear. After he takes office, Trump plans to apply as much pressure as possible using all possible means to protect the economic interests of his country. The cornerstone for the new administration might not only be tariffs on wares from the EU or a new round of trade wars with China, but may also be the struggle for control over key trade routes. Trump will issue many pointed remarks, and he will threaten, bluff, and try to bargain for the best conditions. This has always set him apart from other American leaders.
Furthermore, countries with domain over the territories Trump wishes to lay claim to may react just as sharply because now we’re now talking about their loss of sovereignty. This, in turn, could generate a wave of anti-American sentiment, especially in Latin America, where anti-Americanism is one of the key elements of public policy among those on the left.
An analyst at the Higher School of Economics, Tigran Meloyan – on why Donald Trump suddenly revived the idea controlling the Panama Canal and Greenland.
U.S. President-elect Donald Trump has turned his attention to one of the most important global transport arteries – the Panama Canal – having threatened to retake control. One can understand Trump’s remarks as being a message to two recipients – Panama and China. In the case of Panama, we’re talking about it raising the tariffs for the passage of American vessels. In the case of China, Trump finds it unacceptable for the canal to fall into the “wrong hands” and stray “under the influence” of Beijing.
Washington has many reasons for concern. According to data from the Council on Foreign Relations, Chinese state companies own stock in approximately 100 ports in 64 countries across the world, in all oceans and on all continents, excluding Antarctica, and Beijing definitely doesn’t plan to stop there.
Territorial claims are not something new for the Republican leader. This month he also made direct claims to Canada, which he said could join the U.S. as the 51st state, and laid claim to Greenland, the largest island in the world, offering to buy it from Denmark.
Trump’s rhetoric is a vivid example of how an American leader, in the post-colonial era, tends to threaten sovereign countries into handing all or part of their territory to the United States for control,
Trump’s messages about possibly “returning” the Panama Canal to U.S. jurisdiction take on a certain logic if you look at the developing world situation through the eyes of Americans. Against the developing struggle with China, which is expected to intensify when Trump takes office, it’s vital for the U.S. to ensure control over the most crucial waterways.
The U.S. currently feels uneasy in Panama, the Arctic Ocean and even less so in the Red Sea, where Houthi missiles pose a direct threat to commercial vessels and U.S. Navy ships.
Moreover, the Panama Canal is not just highly valuable to Washington, it is also of strategic importance, both economically and in terms of military strategy. This waterway plays a major role in the development of the global and U.S. economies. After the canal was commissioned, it cut the sea route from New York to San Francisco 14,000 to 6,000 miles, while the route from the East Coast of the U.S. to Asia became 10 days shorter than through the Suez Canal.
It’s also definitely worth noting that in 2022, about one-fourth of American liquefied natural gas supplies passed through the Panama Canal to the Asian markets — Japan, South Korea, China, India. With a growing demand for liquefied natural gas in Asia, a trend that will likely continue in 2025, both American supplies and American attention to the canal will only increase.
Under U.S. control, the Panama Canal could provide passage for U.S. military ships from the Pacific to the Atlantic and back, but bar Chinese or Russian ships by creating artificial obstacles under one pretext or another.
When 39th President Jimmy Carter signed the Torrijos-Carter Treaties in 1977 giving Panama control over the canal, he was hardly guided by the interests of his country. The transfer of the canal to Panamanian jurisdiction took place 25 years ago, in 1999. In general, Carter is spoken of as a failed head of state who achieved his greatest success after leaving office. His term as president, among other things, suffered from economic stagflation, the “loss” of Nicaragua, the breakdown of diplomatic relations with Iran, and a range of serious domestic political crises.
As for Trump’s “territorial expansion” into Greenland, which is claimed by Denmark, the future president asserts that U.S. control over the island should be ensured for national security purposes and for “freedom throughout the world.”
Greenland already plays a crucial role in U.S. defense because it is home to the Pituffik Space Base, which provides missile warning systems, missile defense, and space observation. If required, the base could host war planes, including F-35s.
American leaders have suggested purchasing Greenland before. President Harry Truman offered to buy Greenland for $100 million. Trump, as president, showed interest in the island back in 2019, which strained relations between Washington and Copenhagen.
As such, the picture is clear. After he takes office, Trump plans to apply as much pressure as possible using all possible means to protect the economic interests of his country. The cornerstone for the new administration might not only be tariffs on wares from the EU or a new round of trade wars with China, but may also be the struggle for control over key trade routes. Trump will issue many pointed remarks, and he will threaten, bluff, and try to bargain for the best conditions. This has always set him apart from other American leaders.
Furthermore, countries with domain over the territories Trump wishes to lay claim to may react just as sharply because now we’re now talking about their loss of sovereignty. This, in turn, could generate a wave of anti-American sentiment, especially in Latin America, where anti-Americanism is one of the key elements of public policy among those on the left.
Previous article![]( "Biden’s Visit to Angola: a New Era of US-Africa Relations?")