Panama Seizes CK Hutchison Canal Ports as U.S.-China Chokepoint Rivalry Escalates

Highlights

• Panama's Supreme Court invalidated CK Hutchison's concessions at Balboa and Cristóbal terminals in February, removing them from a $23B BlackRock-led ports deal.
• Federal Maritime Commission Chair Laura DiBella alleged China retaliated by increasing detentions of Panama-flagged ships after the ruling.
• REEx frames the Canal seizure as part of a broader chokepoint rivalry spanning ports, shipping, critical minerals, processing, and finance.
• Supply-chain security for critical minerals now includes the ports, logistics, and financing infrastructure through which strategic materials move.
• The strategic question in Great Powers Era 2.0 is who controls the chokepoint the other side cannot quickly replace.

The Panama Canal has become a live laboratory for Great Powers Era 2.0™. Panama took control of the Balboa and Cristóbal terminals in February after its Supreme Court invalidated concessions held by CK Hutchison's Panama Ports Company. The decision removed the two terminals from CK Hutchison's proposed $23 billion global ports sale to a BlackRock-led consortium and triggered arbitration exceeding $2 billion.

REEx Insight: Rare Earths and Ports Are the Same Strategic Story

A recent CISES policy brief (opens in a new tab) frames Panama primarily as another front in U.S.-China competition. REEx sees something larger: control of chokepoints is migrating from military geography into industrial ecosystems. China's leverage lies heavily in rare-earth separation, metallization, magnets, and manufacturing. American power remains stronger across other nodes—finance, technology, alliances, and maritime security. Panama demonstrates why these systems increasingly interact. After Panama's ruling, Federal Maritime Commission Chair Laura DiBella alleged China dramatically increased detentions of Panama-flagged ships and characterized the inspections as retaliation. China disputes the U.S. characterization.

That matters beyond shipping. In Great Powers Era 2.0, states can exert pressure at different nodes:

ports → shipping → energy → finance → critical minerals → processing → manufacturing. The strategic question is increasingly not who controls everything, but who controls the chokepoint the other side cannot quickly replace.

The Canal Becomes a Chessboard

CK Hutchison operated Balboa and Cristóbal since 1997. Panama took administrative control February 23, appointing APM Terminals at Balboa; subsequent temporary arrangements included Terminal Investment Limited (TIL) Panama at Cristóbal. The policy brief argues Washington should expand U.S. commercial presence across Latin America. That is advocacy, not an established outcome. For critical-mineral investors, the larger lesson is sharper: supply-chain security increasingly includes the infrastructure through which strategic materials move. A non-China mine is not fully diversified if its processing, shipping, financing, or logistics remain exposed to another concentrated chokepoint.

Source: Lola McEwen, "Panama's Ports: A New Front in the U.S.-China Rivalry for the Western Hemisphere," Policy Brief, Centre for International Security and Economic Strategy (CISES), International Security & Conflict Programme, September 24, 2026