Trump misses the era of US empire

The cheering of Donald Trump’s entry into the White House is deafening. He finished saying to shake the heads of the sifs, and that’s exactly what he does. There are no nuances, no tactics, no smiles and no winks. It’s hard to remember when the winner of the election approached the White House with so much drama.

At the beginning of the week, he moved the drama to foreign policy arenas, which he did not mention at all during the long election campaign: the Panama Canal and Greenland. He wants to annex them to the US, he said.

At a rally in Arizona he announced on Sunday that he wants the Panama Canal. This strategic shipping lane, which connects the Atlantic and Pacific oceans, was previously under the control of the United States. In 1977, it agreed to give it up, and in 2000 it finally left. The canal moved to the small country that surrounds it, Panama.

At the time, leaving Panama was an act of goodwill on the part of the US towards Latin America. US control of this prime real estate, roughly half way from Alaska to Tierra del Fuego (Argentina), was frowned upon in the eyes of Latin Americans: an expression of arrogance, of authoritarianism and of greed.

“She will remain ours”

The history of US relations with its southern neighbors has always been very complicated. US marines came in and out, set up governments and overthrew them, humiliated and exploited. This is how the term ‘Banana Republic’ was born, which has since been used in many tongues.

Panama was not exactly one of the banana republics, but its very presence on the map was an expression of forceful American intervention. The USA tore Panama from Colombia in 1903, recognized its independence, and immediately received a corridor of 80 km, at the narrowest point of the American continent. The mining of the canal ended in 1914.

Fifty years ago, there was recognition in Washington that continued direct control of the canal would be detrimental to the long-term interests of the United States. Negotiations to change the canal’s status began under Republican President Gerald Ford in 1974. In the 1976 presidential election, the canal changed the The political history of the United States. Former California Governor Ronald Reagan, who ran against Ford in the presidential primaries, declared “We mined her, she belongs to us, she will remain ours.” Ford then warned that Reagan would lead to a “bloodbath” in Panama, and would turn all of Latin America against the United States.

In 1977 Jimmy Carter entered the White House, dawning a struggle for human rights on his banner. During his time, the US began to encourage the democratization of Latin America. Paradoxically, Panama was actually under the control of a military dictator, but he was identified with the Latin American left. Carter signed a treaty to hand over the canal to Panama in early 2000. Reagan was elected president four years later. He did not try to change the treaty.

Exactly 35 years ago, in December 1989, the US military invaded Panama to overthrow a military dictator, whom the US accused of a series of crimes, including drug smuggling. He was escorted honorably to a prison in Florida, put on trial, and sentenced to 40 years in prison. Even then , the US did not try to change the treaty. The canal was handed over to full sovereignty of Panama in 2000.

From Hawaii to the Philippines

What brought Trump to challenge this sovereignty, and place it in the context of imperial expansion, which characterized the USA in the late 19th and early 20th centuries? This was the time when it decided that it was time to become a world power.

In 1893, American settlers took over the Hawaiian Islands, which had been an independent kingdom until then. Five years later the US annexed Hawaii without reigning in the minds of its inhabitants. In 1899 the US conquered Cuba, the Philippines, Puerto Rico and Guam in the Pacific Ocean from Spain. Soon after, it created the Republic of Panama.

Trump saw the need this week to pay lavish compliments to the two presidents, who initiated and enabled those wars, and gave the USA its first colonies. History has harshly judged some of the USA’s actions in those days. But that was 125 years ago. The US has no pressing need to evoke unpleasant associations with its neighbors.

For now, the reactions in Latin America to Trump’s statement have been relatively subdued. As of Wednesday morning, only the presidents of Mexico and Colombia expressed support for Panama. The Secretary General of the Organization of American States called for the unreserved respect of the agreements that the USA signed with Panama. In Panama itself, the reactions were more agitated. The transfer of the canal into her hands was to a large extent the completion of her independence, a source of pride and patriotism.

Trump claims that Panama did not keep its word, and imposes peppered transit fees on American ships. Moreover, it allows the channel to fall into the “wrong hands”. It is quite clear that he meant China. A Chinese company purchased two ports near the canal, part of the massive acquisition spree that brought China to the port of Haifa as well. The canal will have a heavy strategic weight if the US one day finds itself in a military conflict with China.

This is a common equation with Trump: the US trusts countries, and helps them, but they lead it astray and steal from it. He does not distinguish between friendship and rivalry. China steals from it, but Canada also steals, and Mexico steals, and Europe steals, and he will not allow fraud These continue.

Latin American volcano

Could he be seriously thinking about sending an army to Panama? The US would have no trouble taking control of the canal, but the results could be fatal. A volcano of anti-American sentiment would erupt throughout Latin America, harming US reputation, political standing, economic interests and ultimately American lives.

Maybe Trump is just bending his hands for negotiations, but a threat to the sovereignty of a small and weak country evokes unpleasant associations and is distracting.

This week Trump also renewed his interest in purchasing Greenland, the huge and sparsely populated island, which is under the sovereignty of Denmark. There is no doubt that Greenland will be a first-class strategic asset, especially when climate warming is about to melt much of the ice in and around Greenland. But aren’t the days gone when empires grabbed property just because they coveted it? It is evident in Trump that he is jealous of the presidents of the first decade of the 20th century. Maybe we should all read about those days to better understand this time.