With all the threats being made by Trump over the Panama Canal, let's remember that it's all about Chinese companies operating not the canal itself, but port facilities near it:
Two of the five ports adjacent to the canal, Balboa and Cristóbal, which sit on the Pacific and Atlantic sides respectively, have been operated by a subsidiary of Hutchison Port Holdings since 1997.
The company is a subsidiary of the publicly listed CK Hutchison Holdings, a Hong Kong-based conglomerate founded by Hong Kong businessman Li Ka-shing.
It has port operations in 24 countries, including the UK.
Although it is not state-owned by China, says Ryan Berg, director of the Americas Program at the Centre for Strategic and International Studies, there have been concerns in Washington over how much control Beijing would be able to exert over the company.
A wealth of potentially useful strategic information on ships passing through the waterway flows through these ports.
"There is an increasing geopolitical tension of economic nature between the US and China," Mr Berg says. "That kind of information regarding cargo would be very useful in the event of a supply chain war."
CK Hutchison did not respond to the BBC's request for comment.
The bids to operate those ports faced almost no competition, according to Andrew Thomas, a professor at the University of Akron who has written a book on the canal. "The US at the time didn't really care about these ports and Hutchison faced no objection," he says.
Chinese companies, both private and state-owned, have also strengthened their presence in Panama through billions of dollars in investments, including a cruise terminal and a bridge to be built over the canal.
This "package of Chinese activities", as described by Mr Thomas, might have prompted Trump's assertion that the canal is "owned" by China, but operation of those ports does not equate to ownership, he stresses.
Beijing has repeatedly said that China's ties with Latin America are characterised by "equality, mutual benefit, innovation, openness and benefits for the people".
And this all put me in mind of Darwin and its port being leased to a Chinese company.
Wikipedia summaries the latest in its controversy as follows:
In August 2019, a proposal was launched by Federal Labor MP Nick Champion to re-nationalise the port, thereby ending Chinese control.[17]
A 2021 review of the leasing arrangements found there were no national security grounds to overturn the lease.[18] In October 2023, the federal government announced it will not cancel Landbridge's lease after another review.[18] The announcement brought to an end to an eight-year saga regarding Chinese control of the port.[18]
So given that Trump is an idiot, who would be surprised if he next tries telling the Australian government it has to end that lease, or else tariffs will be imposed?
But that’s not a bad idea. If the three powers carve out areas of influence and the Americans successfully retain Australia, then to keep the peace America needs to give China much more space, but buy off Chinese investments on what it decides is its turf.
ReplyDeleteIf Europe was Russia’s sphere of interest, China had it that Japan, South Korea and the Phillipines were now neutral …… well really one doesn’t know what the details would be. The main thing is we don’t want superpower nukes in quick decapitation range of each other.
ReplyDelete