Trump would invoke treaty clause to “retake” the Panama Canal by military force

United States President Donald Trump would surely base any intervention in the Panama Canal on the DeConcini Condition, often called the “Concini clauses,” a significant provision related to the governance of the Panama Canal and allowing the use of military force to both countries if the security or operation of the canal is threatened.

This condition was introduced by US Senator Dennis DeConcini during the 1978 Senate debates on the Panama Canal treaties. It was incorporated into the Treaty Concerning Permanent Neutrality and the Operation of the Panama Canal, known as the Neutrality Treaty.

Trump promised at his inauguration to regain control of the Panama Canal, which was flatly rejected by the Panamanian government. At the center of the controversy is China.

The ruler has not even ruled out military force to “recover” this 80 km route that, built by the United States and inaugurated in 1914, has been administered by Panama for 25 years.

The DeConcini Condition grants both the United States and Panama the right to take necessary measures, including the use of military force, to reopen the canal or restore its operation if it is closed or its operation is interfered with. .

Although the DeConcini Condition was intended to ensure the uninterrupted operation of the canal, it has been a point of controversy in Panama.

A large part of the population in Panama considers that this provision infringes their sovereignty, since it allows for possible military intervention by the United States. This sentiment was evident when Panamanian leader Omar Torrijos expressed concerns about the ambiguity of the treaties regarding US intervention, which generated student protests and strong public rejection in Panama.

The Constitution of Panama highlights the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the nation. Any provision, such as the DeConcini Condition, that allows foreign military intervention is perceived as conflicting with these constitutional principles. This tension reflects the delicate balance between international agreements and national constitutional mandates.

The Panamanian president, José Raúl Mulino, affirmed this Wednesday at the Davos Forum (Switzerland) that his country has international law on its side in the face of the intentions of the US president, Donald Trump, to recover management of the Panama Canal.

“We have international law on our side” regarding “nationality and sovereignty” (of Panama over the Canal), on our side forever,” said the president after participating in a session at the World Economic Forum (WEF). .

“I feel that the Canal belongs to Panama, in its own right,” Mulino added.

In his statements to the press, the Panamanian president stressed that the Panama Canal is governed by an international Treaty supported by more than 40 countries, which is the only one currently in force in Panama.

«It is a multilateral international Treaty. It’s not just Panama. There are more than 40 countries that have supported the neutrality protocol,” added the president, who when asked if these other countries could be used to enforce the legality of the Canal responded: “Of course. International law must be obeyed and respected.

Mulino did not want to specify what actions he will take in this regard.

“China is operating the Panama Canal… and we are going to recover it,” Trump said on Monday, to which the Panamanian president, José Raúl Mulino, responded that the canal “is and will continue to be” his country’s.

Having said it in the inauguration speech “makes it more likely that it is a serious attempt, although it still seems implausible,” Benjamin Gedan, director of the Latin America program at the Wilson Center, based in Washington, told AFP.

“The Panama Canal was not a concession or a gift made by the United States,” Mulino insisted this Wednesday at the Davos Forum.

– «Bottleneck» –

In the eye of the hurricane, the Chinese company Hutchison Ports, based in Hong Kong, has operated under concession since 1997 the ports of Balboa and Cristóbal, at each entrance of the canal, which connects the Pacific and Atlantic oceans.

In a “moment of conflict” those ports could be used by Beijing “as a bottleneck that prevents international trade” through the canal, warned the head of US diplomacy, Marco Rubio, shortly before taking office.

The route, of which the United States and China are its largest users, is administered by the Panama Canal Authority (autonomous entity). “There is no presence of any nation in the world that interferes,” Mulino said.

«Although it seems like an arbitrary fight, there are reasonable concerns related to the presence of a Chinese company (…). “The canal has enormous value to the United States, both commercially and strategically, and it would not be difficult for Beijing to disrupt its operations,” Gedan said.

The subsidiary of Hutchison Ports, which the Panamanian comptroller’s office opened an audit on Monday, does not manage or make decisions about the road.

For Rebecca Bill Chavez, president of the Inter-American Dialogue, based in Washington, “China does not operate or control the canal” and Panama has “respected” the neutrality of the route and maintained “the efficiency of operations.”

– Chinese presence in Panama –

Trump had already said in 2011 that the United States “stupidly” handed over the channel “in exchange for nothing.” This time he also complains about the fees that American ships pay to cross the waterway. They are a “complete scam,” he said.

“It is a fatuous argument that conceals the intention for Panama to reduce relations with China to a minimum,” Panamanian professor of International Relations, Euclides Tapia, told AFP.

Since Panama broke with Taiwan and established relations with Beijing in 2017, Chinese activity has grown in the country, although the main political and commercial partner continues to be the United States.

In less than seven years, Chinese companies opened subsidiaries, built a cruise port for $206 million at the entrance to the Pacific canal, and are currently building a bridge over the interoceanic route for $1.4 billion.

Trump “believes that he needs to be tough on China,” so if “there is an opportunity to counteract Chinese influence” in the region and in the canal “it is something he likes to talk about,” said the political scientist from the University of Essex, Natasha Lindstaedt.

In 2018, Chinese President Xi Jinping visited Panama. China proposed other million-dollar projects, even trying to install its embassy at the entrance to the canal, but it did not come to fruition due to alleged pressure from Washington.

– Use of force –

As part of the 1977 treaties, by which the United States handed over the canal to Panama in 1999, Panamanians committed to ensuring that the waterway, through which 5% of the world’s maritime trade passes, is permanently open to all countries. .

“None of its principles mention, much less authorize, the United States to recover or claim the canal,” Julio Yao, who was part of the Panamanian team that negotiated the treaties, tells AFP.

But in these agreements there are amendments introduced by the United States regarding the possibility of Washington using military force unilaterally to “defend the canal against any threat” of closure, according to Tapia.

“Only by fabricating a false flag operation, through a covert operation, could Trump justify the use of military force in Panama and that exclusively to keep the canal open, not to take it over and use it economically,” he commented.

Gedan sees “a military intervention unlikely,” but points out that Trump could pressure Panama, for example with tariffs.

“He is trying to scare Panama as much as possible (…) It is a negotiation tool or a distraction, or both,” says Lindstaedt.