The world depends on this route, but no one has a simple solution to ensure its operation. A single successful attack is enough to paralyze traffic. Another threat is naval mines. For Panama, this leaves several lessons.
History shows that great powers have used their military might to keep trade routes open. However, international cooperation, key in these situations, is not guaranteed. The result is a paradox: a single mine can completely close the passage, while keeping it open requires immense resources.
The problem is not only political but also geographical. When one key point fails, the impact multiplies. Every disruption raises costs, delays deliveries, and fuels inflation. We saw this in the Panama Canal during the drought, when water scarcity reduced transit and made trade more expensive.
Global trade depends on specific points operating at their capacity. The world bet on efficiency and volume, sacrificing resilience. Today, this logic faces a new reality: bottlenecks are no longer exceptions but constant points of pressure.
The first lesson is that the strategic value of a canal or strait is not just economic, but geopolitical. The second is that trust is as important as infrastructure. The third is that the future of global trade will be more uncertain.
Iran has demonstrated it can affect transit with relatively simple means: drones, mines, and selective attacks. For Panama, a country whose relevance depends on being a safe transit hub, the warning is clear: in the global transit business, neutrality is not a luxury. It only takes enough fear to make no one want to cross.
