Trump Suggests Military Force for Greenland and Panama Canal Amid Strategic Concerns
President-elect Donald Trump has intensified his rhetoric on securing control of strategic international assets, including the Panama Canal and Greenland. During a news conference at Mar-a-Lago, Trump implied he might consider military intervention to achieve these objectives.
When asked if he would rule out using military force, Trump responded, “It might be that you’ll have to do something.” He described the Panama Canal as “vital” to U.S. interests, criticizing former President Jimmy Carter’s decision to cede control of the canal in 1977 under the Panama Canal Treaty. Trump also emphasized Greenland’s importance for national and economic security, citing its rich resources and strategic location.
The Panama Canal is currently operated by the Panama Canal Authority under Panamanian control. Trump claimed unfair treatment of U.S. ships in canal tariffs, although official policies stipulate that tolls are based on vessel size and cargo type, not nationality. The 1977 treaty guarantees nondiscriminatory access for peaceful transit and authorizes U.S. intervention only if neutrality is threatened.
Trump also expressed interest in acquiring Greenland, despite Denmark and Greenland’s firm opposition. He claimed, “Greenland is needed for protecting the free world.” However, Greenland already hosts a U.S. military base under a longstanding defense treaty, making an acquisition unnecessary from a security standpoint.
Trump’s remarks extended to Canada, suggesting it should become the 51st U.S. state. He argued this move would enhance national security and economic ties. Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau dismissed the proposal, affirming Canada’s sovereignty and strong bilateral partnership with the U.S.
While Trump proposed economic pressure as a strategy, experts highlight legal and diplomatic barriers. For instance, the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), a trade deal brokered during Trump’s presidency, complicates imposing tariffs on Canada without significant consequences.
The president-elect’s suggestion to rename the Gulf of Mexico to the “Gulf of America” appears to be one of his few actionable plans, though it is symbolic rather than substantive.
Trump’s remarks have drawn widespread scrutiny, with experts questioning the feasibility and legality of his proposals. The international community has reiterated its opposition to U.S. control over these territories.
