In a climate of geopolitical distrust, every infrastructure contract or port concession must be an open book. Favoritism, real or perceived, towards one of the blocks only serves to fuel Washington's suspicions or provoke Beijing's retreat, leaving Panama in the middle of an unnecessary diplomatic storm. By strengthening our institutions and ensuring competitive and auditable tender processes, the national government sends a clear message: on the Isthmus, the only interest that prevails is the Panamanian one. In this global chess game, Panama's greatest advantage is its location and constitutional neutrality. The message is clear: every contract signed with a Chinese state-owned company is analyzed in Washington as a possible setback in the historical alliance between Panama and the United States.
The chess of neutrality: making the most of it Faced with this scenario, Panama cannot afford to be a passive spectator. What for many is a show of cultural brotherhood, for others it is a reminder that Panama has become the main chessboard of Asian influence in the Western Hemisphere, under the vigilant and sometimes suffocating gaze of Washington.
A legacy of centuries and the turn of steel The relationship between Panama and China did not begin with the diplomatic agreements of 2017. China is not only the second largest user of the Canal, but its presence on the coasts of Panama has gone from being commercial to being a key piece of its "Belt and Road" initiative.
The Canal in the spotlight: Washington's pressure This advance has not gone unnoticed by the United States. If we play our cards right, the Isthmus can continue to be the meeting point where American capital and Asian efficiency coexist for the benefit of national development. Washington looks with suspicion at the consolidation of operators linked to Chinese capital at both ends of the interoceanic route (Balboa and Cristóbal), warning about the risk that critical infrastructure could fall under the influence of a rival power. The high-level visits of U.S. officials are not mere diplomatic courtesies. In reality, they are reminders that for the Pentagon, the Panama Canal remains a zone of vital interest for hemispheric security. The national government's challenge is not to choose a side, but to maximize the benefits of both worlds. From China, we must attract high-tech investment and financing for necessary infrastructure (such as the train to the interior or water management), but under conditions of transparency that do not compromise our jurisdiction. From the United States, we must leverage Panama's strategic position to demand greater commercial incentives, technology transfer, and security support, reminding them that a partner's loyalty is cultivated with cooperation, not only with warnings, threats, and spreading lies.
For this "best of both worlds" strategy not to become a dangerous tightrope, there is an inescapable requirement: absolute transparency in public tenders. Only with clear rules of the game can we turn the rivalry of powers into a competition of benefits for our development, turning external pressures into opportunities for productive investment.
