OBVIOUSLY, the US administration has started another round of trade war against China and its allies by purchasing 80 percent of the Hutchison Port Group for US$23 billion by its investment firm BlackRock.
It is indeed one of the biggest ports deals ever immediately capturing the geopolitical tensions and trade wars currently gripping the world.
The sale has stirred global markets igniting political debate and reshaping geostrategic dimensions and dynamics.
Definitely, the current deal is so big in terms of geographical sprawl and the potential footprint of the new geopolitical and geostrategic compulsions worldwide.
Evidently, the sale has also sparked political tensions, with Beijing accusing the company of emasculating national interests.
Additionally, it also highlights wider geopolitical implications, echoing US-China tensions and the vital role of infra-structure in global diplomacy.
Interestingly, with Beijing’s disapproval and Trump’s endorsement, the deal under-scores broader global economic shifts potentially affecting international trade and politics in the days to come.
It seems to not be purely a business, economic and financial decision just based on price & cost effects but a geopolitical priority to sell its controlling stake in a subsidiary that operates ports near the Panama Canal to a consortium including BlackRock Inc.an American company.
Frankly speaking, the hailing of Donald Trump dubbing it victory for his government and USA vividly reflects the US harsh diplomacy and geopolitics trying to control and contain China regional as well as international economic expansion and manufacturing capacity.
On the other hand, it seems to be the first giant step towards minimizing China’s champion position in global shipping building and blue economy exports and its sale has effectively put the ports under American control after President Donald Trump alleged Chinese interference with the operations of the critical shipping lane.
Critical analysis of the deal reveals that the said deal will give the BlackRock consortium sharing control over 43 ports in 23 countries, including the ports of Balboa and Cristobal, located at either end of the Panama Canal.
Other ports are in Mexico, the Netherlands, Egypt, Australia, Pakistan and elsewhere.
Thus another war trade in terms of global shipping and container ports has been started which has many spillover socio-economic, geopolitical and geostrategic repercussions for China and the rest of the world.
Additionally, withdrawal of Panama from the Chinese BRI following Rubio’s visit, was the first step towards controlling the Panama Canal.
Thus it is also a global set back to BRI expansion in the Latin America region which would gradually reduce its economic presence and exports.
Furthermore, the sale of Hutchison’s assets to the BlackRock-led consortium is seen as a betrayal of China’s economic and export interests, reinforcing US efforts to contain China’s rise in key sectors like semiconductor chips, trade and supply chains.
This move, part of a broader geostrategic agenda, strengthens US control over global ship-ping, particularly at both ends of the Panama Canal.
By raising logistics costs and disrupting supply chains, it weakens China’s trade competitiveness.
However, China remains the largest trading partner for over 120 nations and a crucial player in global logistics, with dominance in rare earths, components and shipping infrastructure.
Seven of the world’s top 11 container ports are located in China, including Hong Kong.
However, apart from air cargo and rail freight, most Chinese goods are transported by ship around the globe.
Thus, control of Hutchison’s global port portfolio would make critical sense to an “America First” strategy.
It is true that among global ports, the ports at either end of the Panama Canal are of such vital importance to President Trump’s ambitions that he announced his intention to take back control of the canal in his inauguration speech in January 2025.
According to official data, China’s global shipbuilding market share has grown from less than 5 percent in 1999 to more than 50 percent in 2023.
China controls 95 percent of shipping container production and 86 percent of the world’s supply of intermodal chassis.
This dominance by China’s shipping is seen by the US as part of its existential threat.
On the other hand, America’s shipbuilding industries have been uncompetitive for a very long time.
Not only are US vessels much more expensive to make, but operating a US vessel costs around twice as much as South Korean or Chinese vessels.
In summary, the deal is a deceit to Chinese cause because CK Hutchison did not seek its approval in advance, and because Beijing had planned to use the port issue as a bargaining chip in negotiation with the Trump administration.
Now the Panama Canal would give a comparative advantage to it enabling America to control the key shipping channel connecting the two oceans on both sides of the American continent.
It seems that these territorial ambitions would give the US’ undisputed supremacy over the entire Western Hemisphere exerting its influence in the Asia-Pacific and other domains through “offshore balancing” and long-armed coercion.
According to a New York news article of March 5, the Trump administration is also preparing an executive order designed to reinvigorate US shipbuilding and reduce China’s stronghold over the global maritime industry.
The Chinese policy makers should take all possible measures to protect its economic interests.
—The writer is President, Pak-China Corridor of Knowledge, Executive Director, CSAIS, regional expert: China, CPEC & BRI. (mehmoodulhassankhan@yahoo.com)
