Panama was the first Latin American country to join the belt and road initiative of China (BRI). Last month, he also became the first to leave him. Since its creation in 2013, more than 150 countries have participated in the infrastructure program aimed at increasing Chinese trade, with more than 20 in Latin America. After the removal of Panama, a regional domino effect cannot be excluded.
Since his entry into office in January, US President Donald Trump has repeatedly accused the country of giving up control of the Panama Canal in China. Panamanian President José Raúl Mulino and Beijing officials deny affirmations. However, following a diplomatic journey from the Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Panama announced that it would make its agreement with China.
Tensions remain. While a 1977 Treaty signed by the United States transferred full authority to the navigable track in Panama in 2000, Trump did not take control of it.
The departure of Panama compared to the BRI is the first visible result of the Trump administration foreign policy, explains Evodio Kaltenecker, associate professor of trade and international strategy at the Amore-Mckim activity school in Northeastern University. “The bri-xit, puncture, can be seen through different lenses. First, the geopolitical question: Western countries are concerned with the growing influence of China in the world. Panama and its channel clearly point out that the United States plan to fight against regional economic partnerships in Beijing and to deepen. There are no empty spaces in geopolitics. If Chinese influence decreases, the influence led by Washington will regain relevance. »»
Second, Kaltenecker continues, there is what he likes to call a “geoeconomic effect” which has an impact on international trade: “The Panama canal is not only a key element of the American freight transport system but also a critical way of global trade. For example, around 5% of world trade goes through the Panama Canal each year, stressing the importance of the canal as a seaway. »»
Finally, supports Kaltenecker, there is a “signaling effect”. “No coincidence, the withdrawal of Panama came a few days after Rubio’s visit to Panama City,” added Kaltenecker. “American pressure in the Panamanian case will probably put the scheme for new Washington movements.”