The use of force by the US to gain control of the Panama Canal and Greenland will hurt American interests more than it will hurt Chinese ones, analysts say.
US President-elect Donald Trump said at a press conference on Jan 7 that he wants to acquire the Panama Canal, which falls under the sovereignty of Panama in Central America, and the Arctic island Greenland, which is an autonomous territory of Denmark.
He said Greenland was vital to US national security and the Panama Canal – which he claimed, falsely, was operated by China – was crucial to America’s economic security.
Trump added at the press conference that he does not rule out using force to take back the Panama Canal, which the US had controlled until 1999, and Greenland, which was occupied by the US during World War II.
Both places are strategically important to China as they provide access to shipping lanes for global trade and for their mineral resources.
Analysts scoffed at the idea that Trump would use military might to gain control of the canal and the world’s largest island.
“The chances of the US using force in either Greenland or Panama are zero,” Dr Scott Kennedy of US think-tank Centre for Strategic and International Studies told The Straits Times.
“That’s just noise and an expression of US interest in those two areas, with regard to access to minerals, shipping routes and concerns about resiliency – normal concerns expressed in a very abnormal way.”
Many Chinese analysts ST spoke to expect Trump to be fully prepared to climb down from the threat of using force.
“Most people know that Trump is someone who asks for the sky at the beginning of a negotiation but is prepared to settle at the ground level,” said Professor Cui Hongjian, a Europe expert at Beijing Foreign Studies University.
He thinks Trump can more realistically achieve his aim of ensuring US economic security in Greenland by taking a softer approach, such as by encouraging the world’s largest island to seek more autonomy from Denmark, which could leave more room for US influence.
But if Trump were to adopt a softer approach, this would mean that he would be less able to ride roughshod over Greenland’s commercial interests, which are the basis for Greenland’s willingness to allow Chinese investments in its mines, Prof Cui said.
China is also keen to use a possible shipping route near Greenland that would open up as the Arctic ice recedes with global warming.
Trump said on Jan 7 that “there are China ships all over the place… we’re not letting it happen”.
Prof Cui said that it is “laughable” for the US to want to restrict the freedom of navigation for Chinese commercial and scientific research vessels in the Arctic when it has championed such navigation rights in the South China Sea.
As for the Panama Canal, it would be difficult for Trump to restrict Chinese trading ships from using it.
A Neutrality Treaty, which guarantees permanent neutrality of the canal with fair access for all nations and non-discriminatory tolls, has been in place since the US handed the waterway over to Panama in 1999.
“I am not aware of any initiative to change that,” Dr Evan Ellis, a research professor of Latin American studies at the US Army War College Strategic Studies Institute, told ST.
US analysts had warned that a growing Chinese presence in the Panama Canal, if left unchecked, could threaten US economic security.
After Panama cut ties with Taiwan and switched diplomatic allegiance to China in 2017, and became the first Latin American country to sign up to China’s Belt and Road Initiative in 2018, Chinese presence in the canal has grown.
While China does not control the canal, the control of major ports on both the Atlantic and Pacific ends of the waterway by Chinese and Hong Kong companies has stoked fears among US advisers that China could potentially seal off the canal to obstruct the passage of US vessels.
China is the second-largest user of the Panama Canal after the US.
There are about 40 Chinese companies operating around the canal now, in fields such as logistics, finance and electricity.
Dr Ellis gave examples of favourable deals that the previous Panama government had given to Chinese companies: generous terms for China-based Hutchison Port Holdings’ lease renewal to operate critical port concessions; China Landbridge’s bid to establish a major new container port in Colon; an unnecessary US$4 billion (S$5.48 billion) fast passenger train system and a redundant construction of a fourth trans-Panama power line.
New questionable initiatives include deals to pay Power China to install 530MW of solar capacity, and 5G and smart cities projects that could have data risks, he said.
Dr Ellis said: “In times of war between the PRC (People’s Republic of China) and the West, the knowledge that comes with economic presence and knowledge of the canal zone and its vulnerabilities could be exploited to shut down the canal in ‘deniable’ ways, from the sinking of container ships in key locations, physical or digital sabotage of the locks themselves (and) threats from mining, (to) threats to shipping at the entrances to the canal.”
Dr Kennedy said that China needs to do more to reassure the US and other countries that “they are not a destabilising force, that they are a provider of public goods not meant to serve China’s narrow national interests”.
Chinese analysts say that if the US were to use force or other strong-handed ways to restrict Chinese companies’ lawful activities in Panama and Greenland, the collective damage to Western values and to the US’ relationship with the rest of the world would be much more than the hurt to Chinese interests.
“US has a hegemonic logic. It wants freedom to act as it pleases, and to control everything tied to its interests. If China also does that, wouldn’t the world be guided by the rule of the jungle?” said Prof Wu Xinbo, a US expert at Fudan University in Shanghai.
Yew Lun Tian is a senior foreign correspondent who covers China for The Straits Times.
Join ST’s Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
Source link : http://www.bing.com/news/apiclick.aspx?ref=FexRss&aid=&tid=67803b9fad9f4c97aee530df0c06619f&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.straitstimes.com%2Fworld%2Fus-cant-hurt-chinas-interests-in-panama-and-greenland-without-hurting-itself-analysts-say&c=12554512062053669295&mkt=en-us
Author :
Publish date : 2025-01-09 08:00:00
Copyright for syndicated content belongs to the linked Source.
