If you watched the Tucker on X interview with Trump you would have caught the clips about China moving in on Cuba and “owning” the Panama Canal. Trump repeatedly kept stating the historical facts of the importance of the Panama Canal, how it was built, how it was dangerous and # of workers who died (35k dead). More importantly, how we gave up sovereignty to the important canal to Panama and sold it to them for a measly $1. He kept repeating the line “for a $1”, and I knew these were important crumbs…

The statement that the Panama Canal was sold for $1 is not accurate. The Panama Canal was not sold for $1; rather, it was transferred to Panama through a process that involved negotiations, treaties, and international agreements.

The construction and ownership of the Panama Canal were initially under the control of the French company led by Ferdinand de Lesseps. However, due to financial difficulties and high mortality rates among workers, the French company abandoned the project. The United States then took over the construction of the canal.

In 1903, Panama, which was part of Colombia at the time, sought independence with the support of the United States. Following Panama's declaration of independence, the U.S. government negotiated the Hay-Bunau-Varilla Treaty with the newly independent Panama. This treaty granted the United States control over the Panama Canal Zone in perpetuity.

Under the terms of the treaty, the United States paid Panama an initial lump sum payment and agreed to pay an annual rent for the use of the canal zone. The amount of compensation to Panama was not $1 but a negotiated sum (small but not a $1).

In 1977, the Torrijos-Carter Treaties were signed, leading to the eventual transfer of the Panama Canal from U.S. control to Panamanian sovereignty. The transfer was completed on December 31, 1999. The Panamanian government assumed full control of the canal and its operations, marking the end of over 85 years of U.S. control.

—

So why say this? What’s so important to find in this piece of history? It lies within the treaty that was signed.

—

The Torrijos-Carter Treaties, signed in 1977 and officially known as the Panama Canal Treaty and the Neutrality Treaty, led to the eventual transfer of control of the Panama Canal from the United States to Panama. While many of the treaty's details are well-known, here are a few lesser-known aspects:

1. Neutrality of the Canal Zone: The Neutrality Treaty, which accompanied the Panama Canal Treaty, stipulated that the Panama Canal Zone would remain neutral. This meant that the canal and its surrounding area would not be used for military purposes by any nation. It was intended to ensure the continued operation and safety of the canal without the threat of military conflicts.

2. U.S. Retained Certain Rights: While the treaties granted Panama control over the canal and its zone, the United States retained certain rights related to the canal's defense and security. This included the right to intervene in order to keep the canal open and operational.

3. Long-Term Leasing of Land: The Panama Canal Treaty required the United States to return all the land within the Panama Canal Zone to Panama by 1999. However, in the lead-up to the transfer, a portion of land was leased back to the U.S. government for the continued operation of certain military facilities, including Howard Air Force Base and other installations.

4. Economic Assistance: The treaties provided for economic assistance from the United States to Panama. This was aimed at helping Panama's economy adjust to the changes brought about by the transition and the new responsibilities associated with operating the canal.

5. Non-Nuclear Zone: The Neutrality Treaty declared the canal zone a "nuclear-free zone." It prohibited the presence, storage, or use of nuclear weapons within the zone.

6. Ratification and Opposition: The treaties faced opposition in both the United States and Panama. In the United States, there were concerns about national security and the potential loss of control over a strategically important waterway. In Panama, there were concerns about the economic and social impacts of the canal's transfer. The treaties were narrowly approved by the U.S. Senate and faced protests in Panama as well.

7. Revised Treaties: The initial versions of the treaties were rejected by the U.S. Senate. Negotiations between the two countries led to revised treaties that addressed some of the concerns raised by opponents.

These lesser-known aspects tell us a story about the geopolitical power of the canal and China controlling this canal today with enormous benefits. We have crazy leverage over this still and also control militarily, if china moves ahead to shut down global supply chains which would cripple us and the west majorly; we would have the power to stop it. Could Trump also be hinting at more? Would love your thoughts.