Could Donald Trump Really Take Control of the Panama Canal Again Legally?

Does Trump Want to Reclaim the Panama Canal? Analysis and Context

Reading time : 1 minute, Discovery Chepe Id-615-SOC
Published in 03-14-2025

The control of the Panama Canal is governed by the 1977 Torrijos-Carter Treaty, which established the full transfer to Panama in 1999. Since then, the canal has been managed by the Panama Canal Authority (ACP), an autonomous entity of the Panamanian government.
Any attempt by the U.S. to reclaim the canal without Panama's consent would violate international law and the existing treaty.

Pros of the U.S. Taking Control of the Panama Canal
- Security and Stability: The U.S. could ensure greater protection against global and geopolitical threats.
- Infrastructure Investment: The U.S. could provide additional resources to improve the efficiency and modernization of the canal.
- Commercial Interests: Securing the trade flow for the U.S. could be beneficial for its economy and that of its allies.

Trump's Interest in the Panama Canal: Tariffs, Control, and Geopolitics

Cons of the U.S. Attempting to Reclaim Control
- Violation of International Law: A unilateral attempt would be considered an act of aggression and could trigger sanctions or diplomatic conflicts.
- Reaction from Panama and the International Community: Panama could appeal to organizations such as the UN and OAS to denounce the action.
- Economic Impact: Any conflict could affect global trade and investor confidence in the region.

Would This Violate the Law?
Yes, any attempt by Donald Trump or the U.S. to reclaim the Panama Canal without the Panamanian government's consent would violate the Torrijos-Carter Treaty and international law. This could have severe diplomatic and economic consequences.

The Panama Canal has been under Panama's sovereign control since 1999. While the U.S. maintains an interest in its security and operation, any attempt to retake control by force would be illegal and could spark an international crisis. Diplomatic avenues remain the only viable option for any U.S. influence over the canal.