Panama
Trump wants the Panama Canal back. It is a relatively
new original idea, compared to Canada and Greenland, and the wildest and most
imperialist idea. Should France and Britain follow and reclaim the Suez Canal,
which Nasser nationalised in 1956? Of course, the security of strategic sea
routes is in everyone's fundamental interest and right. In this respect, the
Panama Canal is one of the most important, compared only with the importance of
the Suez Canal. But beyond that, there are also a good number of very important
and critical places, routes, straits in the Arabian Gulf, in the Red Sea. Their
security in all respects (military, economic and logistical security) is of
fundamental interest to all. But there can be no solution to the problem of
America asking for the return of the gift that Jimmy Carter generously gave
Panama in 1977. For Panama's solidarity is as valuable and deserves the same
recognition and respect as America's, or anyone else's, solidarity.
Whether the Chinese have too big a
role in the management and control of the Panama Canal is a complex issue.
Indeed, China is now Panama's second largest partner after the United States.
But the Canal is important to China not only because of Sino-Panamanian
relations, but also because China is one of the largest carriers of goods by
sea, it sheds its goods all over the world, and the security of the sea routes
is of the utmost importance to them. But that does not mean they have the right
to get their hands on the Panama Canal. But that is not the case, from what we
know. They are very actively involved in the maintenance and development of the
canal, but for them, maritime shipping in general, and port construction in
particular are strategic sectors. They are very active in this area, and you
can't begrudge them that. China had a very generous plan to build a second
canal in Nicaragua. This took shape and started in the early '10s, and then it
turned out to be too big, too difficult, too expensive and quietly almost died
out, but you never know... Technology is improving, it could well be that in a
few years it would not be so difficult and so expensive to build this temporary
canal in Nicaragua. But that is another question. The previous question here is
what to do about the safety of the priority shipping routes.
It's
quite obvious that the solution is not for America to ensure their security,
perhaps by occupying them or by placing them under its jurisdiction. The
solution that is offered, I think, is quite obvious and logical, to organise an
international force under the auspices of the United Nations to look after the
security of the important sea routes, all over the globe. This would be a new,
very important, very significant and very strategic direction and function in
the hands of the international organisation. We should think very seriously
about organising the implementation of this. This cannot be the solution that
NATO has practically used and is using against the Houthis in the Red Sea. It
cannot be a unilateral, particularistic force; it should be a legitimate,
international force in which everyone could and should participate, under a
common, unified command.
This is a very serious initiative,
again, and again I have to say, for the third time, thank you, Mr. Trump, for
dropping the ball, now the world has to strike.
No comments:
Post a Comment