巴拿马运河的中国合同被裁定违宪,特朗普的“Donroe主义”获胜。
Chinese Contract At Panama Canal Ruled Unconstitutional In Win For Trump's 'Donroe Doctrine'

原始链接: https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/chinese-contract-panama-canal-ruled-unconstitutional-win-trumps-donroe-doctrine

巴拿马最高法院裁定,香港公司和记黄埔(CK Hutchison)运营巴拿马运河两端港口的25年特许经营权延期违宪。该裁决是在一项法律挑战之后做出的,该挑战指控原特许经营权及其续期存在财务违规行为,并对巴拿马纳税人造成了损失,估计为13亿美元。 此案源于特朗普政府的压力,旨在重申美国对这条具有战略意义的运河的影响力,该运河由美国建造并于1999年移交给巴拿马。和记黄埔的股份出售给包括黑石集团在内的财团的提议,据报道因中国政府的反对而搁置。 该裁决被视为美国的胜利,特朗普政府的一位官员称之为“美国的胜利”。它呼应了美国在巴拿马的历史干预,包括1989年的入侵,被描绘成保护运河的行为,引发了人们对特朗普“多诺罗主义”下美国未来可能的行动的担忧。

相关文章

原文

Another massive defeat for China's interests in the Western Hemisphere, and another 'win' for Trump's "Donroe Doctrine"...

The Supreme Court of Panama has just issued a final decision to void the contract renewal for Hong Kong's CK Hutchison's subsidiary to operate two Panama Canal ports, in a much anticipated landmark case driven by claims of unconstitutionality and financial irregularities. The top court has found irregularities in the 25-year extension of the concession granted in 2021.

The contested position that CK Hutchison occupied conferred de facto leverage over one of the world's most critical maritime chokepoints linking the two oceans, provoking the scrutiny and ire of Washington.

This was legally challenged last year, with the question of whether CK Hutchison violated the terms of its concessions - including the renewal granted in 2021 - allegedly harming taxpayers and breaching the country's constitution.

Crucially the lawsuit came directly at the behest of the Trump administration amid immense pressure put on Panama City, and was subsequently filed by Panama's government following an official audit claiming CK Hutchison's management shortchanged Panama by roughly $1.3 billion. And in the meantime:

CK Hutchison Holdings announced a deal last year to sell its majority stake in the Panamanian ports and others around the world to an international consortium that included BlackRock Inc. But the [$22.8 billion] deal appeared to stall over objections by the Chinese government.

Trump had publicly praised that later stalled transaction in March. This after the White House's eyeing of Panama began nearly a year ago with Secretary of State Marco Rubio's January 31, 2025 visit - his first foreign trip as new Secretary of State. This served to put control of the country's ports squarely at top of the US agenda for Latin America policy.

President Trump has long made clear his intention to reassert American influence and control over the Panama Canal, given the strategic artery was built by the United States in the early 20th century and formally transferred to Panama in 1999. He has made statements expressing wanting it back, essentially.

We had previewed just last week:

As for another country which could increasingly be in Trump crosshairs for either a pressure campaign (or worse) under the 'Donroe Doctrine' is Panama, already subject of the mid-December 1989 US military invasion which deposed on-again-off-again Washington ally (and long-running CIA asset) and military dictator Manuel Noriega. The historic Operation Just Cause mission saw over 27,000 US troops invade, ostensibly to go after Noriega for drug trafficking and to protect the Panama Canal.

A mission to 'protect' the Panama Canal could once again be used as rationale for American intervention in 2026.

And now: "It's not just a huge win for Panama's taxpayers, it's a big win for America and certainly for President Trump," a senior Trump administration official told Axios Thursday in anticipation of the court ruling going Washington's way.

Source: CGTN

* * *

Below is a rush machine translation from the official Supreme Court statement:

Republic of Panama
Judicial Branch

STATEMENT

The Full Bench of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Republic of Panama hereby informs the general public that during its ordinary session held today, January 29, 2026, after extensive deliberation and discussion of Filing No. 119313-2025 and Filing No. 17547-2025 — both consisting of constitutional challenges against Law No. 5 of January 16, 1997, its addenda, and the extension agreement — and in fulfillment of its duty as guardian of the Political Constitution, it decided to declare them UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

The challenged laws and acts are related to the Concession Contract between the State and Panama Ports Company, S.A., for the development, construction, operation, administration, and management of port terminals for containers, Ro-Ro cargo, passengers, bulk cargo, and general cargo at the ports of Balboa and Cristóbal.

Loading recommendations...

联系我们 contact @ memedata.com