Trump negotiates a new Panama Canal treaty for the American people

President-elect Trump said this week that the United States would ask Panamanian officials to return control of the Panama Canal to the United States if Panama does not stop “blackmailing” it, arousing the attention of Panama and the entire international community.

Trump argued that the United States built it and paid for it, and that President Jimmy Carter “foolishly abandoned it.”

President José Raúl Mulino countered that the Panama Canal belonged to Panama. Trump noted, “It’s for Panama and the Panamanian people, but it has stipulations. You have to treat us fairly, and they didn’t treat us fairly.”

There is no doubt that what Trump is doing is negotiating a new treaty on the Panama Canal to get a better deal for the American people. This is very similar to the playbook executed by President Teddy Roosevelt, who maneuvered a complex situation involving France, the Colombian government, and the people of Panama to build the Panama Canal.

Panamanian president pushes back on Trump’s idea of ​​taking back key canal

The Panama Canal is critical to free trade and U.S. national security interests. About 73% of all ships passing through the Panama Canal are traveling to and from U.S. ports.

It is also critical to international supply chains and global maritime trade itself. It played a huge role in transporting supplies needed by the Allied forces during World War II, and thousands of U.S. troops were stationed there to ensure their safety.

Of greatest concern now is Communist China’s growing influence in Central and South America. In 2017, under former Panamanian President Juan Carlos Varela, Panama switched from diplomatic recognition of Taiwan to recognition of communist China. The then-Trump administration took action, with Varela’s administration canceling five infrastructure projects with Chinese companies following a visit by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo in October 2018.

“America First” VS. “America Last”: What does Trump’s return mean for U.S. foreign policy?

FreightWaves CEO Craig Fuller recently noted that there are concerns that “China may embed surveillance technology in the canal infrastructure that could be used to monitor U.S. naval and commercial activities.” He further noted that the potential for such espionage increases strategic risks, and potentially provide China with important insights into U.S. logistics and military operations.

This certainly helps explain why Gen. Laura Richardson, commander of U.S. Southern Command, told the House Armed Services Committee earlier this year that “China is executing our playbook, which is to be economically present and militarily equip America’s Western Hemisphere neighbors.” From a timing perspective, the new Panamanian president who took office earlier this year is considered to be more ideologically consistent with Trump and therefore more suitable to negotiate with him.

President-elect Trump’s Syria dilemma: Intervene or turn it into a terror state

It is important to understand the history of the Panama Canal Treaty. In 1977, President Carter negotiated full control of the canal to Panamanian military leader General Omar Torrijos, who came to power in a coup. He is also an ally of Manuel Noriega.

Abandoning the Panama Canal was extremely unpopular in the United States, which was one of the reasons Ronald Reagan was able to close the gap with President Gerald Ford in the 1976 Republican presidential campaign. As Reagan prepared for his successful 1980 presidential campaign, he addressed this issue in a speech at Western Kentucky University.

There he blasted the Carter administration for handing over the canal to “a man there (Omar Torrijos) not because he had the most votes, but because he had the most guns.” Reagan went on to say internationally that the world would not view the gift of the canal as “a generous gesture on our part…” but as “another American retreat and retreat in the face of trouble.”

Click here for more Fox News views

One thing that many observers overlook is that many legal scholars agree that the president of the United States has the authority to revoke or terminate treaties. For example, in 2002, President George W. Bush unilaterally withdrew the United States from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty.

Likewise, President William Meakinley terminated certain provisions of a commercial treaty with Switzerland, and President Calvin Coolidge withdrew the United States from a convention preventing smuggling with Mexico.

During World War II, President Franklin Roosevelt unilaterally terminated many treaties. Trump is expected to use the threat to negotiate a treaty or at least force concessions from the Panamanian government.

Click here to get the Fox News app

Trump inherits the most complex foreign policy landscape a commander in chief has ever faced. Whether it is the growing threat from the Chinese Communist Party, Iran’s nuclear weapons ideology, turmoil in the Middle East, or the situation between Russia and Ukraine, Trump faces continued national security challenges on the world stage.

Yes, it’s a chess game, and so far, America’s incoming commander-in-chief is playing it like the late world chess champion Bobby Fischer.

Click here to learn more about Van HIPP