Sec. of State Rubio Asserts Trump’s Plans for Greenland & Panama Canal Serious, Based on Security Concerns
Meanwhile, President Trump reveals plans to order 40 large icebreakers for the United States Coast Guard.
Earlier this week, I covered the histrionics of European leaders over President Donald Trump’s plans for a new relationship with Greenland, especially as it is poised to make a move for independence.
Even the French were riled up enough to offer their troops.
Meanwhile, on the the other side of “the pond”, Trump’s new team at the State Department is proceeding with their plans and ignoring the Euro-drama.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio says President Donald Trump’s desire to acquire Greenland and retake control of the Panama Canal is driven by legitimate national security interests stemming from growing concerns about Chinese activity and influence in the Arctic and in Latin America.
Ahead of a trip to Central America that will start in Panama this weekend, Rubio said Thursday that he could not predict if Trump would succeed in buying Greenland from Denmark or restoring American authority over the Panama Canal while he is office. But he said the attention that Trump will give to both would have an impact.
“What I think you can rest assured of is that four years from now, our interest in the Arctic will be more secure; our interest in the Panama Canal will be more secure,” Rubio said in an interview with SiriusXM host Megyn Kelly.
Rubio will arrive in Panama on Saturday on his first official foreign trip as America’s top diplomat, signaling the importance that both he and Trump place on securing the canal. Although immigration will be a major topic of conversation in Panama and at his other stops, Rubio said the canal issue is a priority.
secretary of state marco rubio on trump’s greenland ambitions
“this is not a joke…this is not about acquiring land for the purpose of acquiring land. this is in our national interest.” pic.twitter.com/ngp3p1KDhP— ian bremmer (@ianbremmer) January 31, 2025
While I have been focused on Greenland in my reports, I would note significant concerns about China’s influence on the Panama Canal. Panama Ports Company, a subsidiary of CK Hutchison Holdings, a Hong Kong-based conglomerate, has managed two key ports adjacent to the canal since 1997 — Balboa on the Pacific side and Cristóbal on the Atlantic. Although not directly controlled by the Chinese government, this arrangement has raised concerns about potential Chinese influence in the region.
Beijing’s national security laws now extend to Hong Kong.
Former Republican Senator Marco Rubio, now Trump’s secretary of state, has criticized Chinese influence over the canal. In his Senate confirmation hearing, he said that Beijing, through the expansion of Chinese-owned companies, has “the ability to turn the canal into a choke point in a moment of conflict,” which is “a direct threat to the interests and the national security of the United States.”
In the wake of Trump’s and Rubio’s statements, Panama has launched an audit of the Panama Ports Company.
And, as a reminder, the terms of the treaty we have with Panama regarding the canal include the right to defend it from any threat that might interfere with its continued neutral service.
Now, let’s return to Greenland. In an intriguing move, Trump has ordered 40 new icebreakers for the country.
The U.S. Coast Guard currently has funds from Congress for a planned three-vessel order for the Polar Security Cutter program, built by Bollinger. The first was approved in late December after years of delay, and the program faces cost overruns. The service’s last icebreaker study suggested a need for at least three more medium icebreakers in addition to the current program of record, and its regional icebreaker fleet for the Great Lakes is also advancing in age.
At present, the service’s seagoing fleet has one heavy icebreaker and one medium icebreaker – both aging – and one “bridging strategy” icebreaker, a commercial conversion that will fill gaps until delivery of the first Polar Security Cutter.
“President Donald Trump is continuing his first-term focus on building a big, new American icebreaker fleet” https://t.co/bnnJSHlIwB
— Transatlantic Policy Center
(@AU_EuropeCenter) January 30, 2025
The chess pieces are being moved by a team that finally places American interests first.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Forty new ice breakers? Where’s the money coming from, where are the crews coming from, and what’s the lead time between laying the keel and commissioning?
.
The following paragraph from the article that Leslie Eastman links regarding “China’s national security laws now extend to Hong Kong” (https://www.cfr.org/article/who-controls-panama-canal) is relevant to the issue of sanctions on China and Mexico:
Over the past two decades, China has developed close economic ties with many Latin American countries. Beijing is currently South America’s top trading partner and a major source of foreign direct investment and energy and infrastructure lending, including through its Belt and Road Initiative—of which Panama is a member. China has also been involved in several infrastructure projects in Panama, including the construction of a cruise-ship terminal and a convention center.
Sorry, Peter Moss; I mean to post that as a reply to my own earlier comment.
I didn’t have Greenland on my vacation bingo card but perhaps I should.
I personally think that China is a paper tiger but what do
I know? That said, I do not believe in surrendering strategic assets like the Panama Canal (Carter was such an idiot) and if annexing Greenland in a mutually agreeable manner can be worked out, that’s fine with me.
Update (Some good news): https://legalinsurrection.com/2025/02/panama-backs-out-of-chinas-silk-road-agreement/
I think that some sort of arrangement with Greenland and America is likely and that it will be good for both America and Greenland.
I think China’s economy is its weakness, but, the country’s military forces and assets must be taken seriously, and, the regime’s perennial belligerence in cyber-warfare/hacking, aggressive military and fishing boat provocations (e.g., in and around Taiwanese, Filipino and other waters), artificial island building and now, sabotage of seabed communications cables, demonstrate that this is a country committed to bullying behavior, malign machinations and designs and escalating aggressiveness.
I forgot to mention China’s usurious and exploitative “Belt and Road” program, which saddles Third World countries with massive debt and malignant Chinese “patronage,” after they’ve paid for shoddily-constructed infrastructure assets.
I’m made constantly uneasy by this script in which two obscure geopolitical issues that no one cared about or had even heard of until two weeks ago are suddenly thrust in front of the American public, whereupon supportive policy wonks begin to disgorge all sorts of tactical issues that mean dire consequences to the USA if they are not immediately addressed in the fashion outlined by those in power.
TL;DR: I’m old enough to remember Quemoy and Matsu,
Also, if Greenland is a factor in ordering new icebreakers, why would you issue them to the US Coast Guard?
The ice breaker ships are historically a CG function. They exist to clear passage for primarily commercial vessels though obviously Naval vessels could benefit. It also has the benefit of not falling under the DoD budget which probably gets them Congressional support more broadly. the cost of their addition won’t add to DoD budget top line nor directly compete with other DoD priorities within the DoD budget. Inter service wrangling/feuding over the size of their respective piece of the DoD budget pie is complicated enough without adding the CG to the fray.
Yeah, but all those are budgetary issues. When all is said and done, are we really going to detail the USCG on missions to Greenland?
Sure. The can proceed the convoy of Naval vessels in what is absolutely, clearly NOT a military incursion, just a simple, routine ‘maritime security operation’ to uh…crack down on the growing threat of piracy and fully able to transition to a peacekeeping role as required. That’s the ticket!
The United States has been in dire need of ice breakers for decades but administrations have ignored them instead focusing on condoms for terrorists and building windmills. It’s long past time someone took this seriously.