Subject: U.S. Strategic Focus on Panama, Migration Crisis, and Chinese Influence
Background:
On Saturday’s WarRoom Steve Bannon and Michael Yon talked about the current geopolitical landscape in Panama, which has drawn significant attention from U.S. officials and independent analysts due to its strategic location and the growing migration crisis in the region. Yon, an independent journalist with extensive experience in the Darien Gap, and Bannon, former chief strategist to President Donald Trump, highlighted Panama as a critical focal point for U.S. national security interests. This situation report provides an update on their insights regarding the strategic importance of Panama, Chinese influence, and the role of migration in shaping U.S. foreign policy.
Quick Clip:
WEAPONS OF MASS MIGRATION: Michael Yon On Panama Canal Port Sale @Michael_Yon pic.twitter.com/gMVZ4xsZI0
— Bannon’s WarRoom (@Bannons_WarRoom) March 15, 2025
Strategic Importance of Panama:
Panama holds an essential geopolitical position, serving as a crucial conduit between the Pacific and Atlantic Oceans via the Panama Canal. This narrow strip of land connects key shipping routes and is central to U.S. trade and military interests in the Western Hemisphere. Both Yon and Bannon emphasize the importance of Panama to President Trump, highlighting his focus on the region during his administration. Bannon recalls that when Senator Marco Rubio was appointed to a key diplomatic role under Trump, he was sent to Panama rather than other major global capitals such as London or Beijing. This decision reflects Panama’s growing strategic priority within U.S. foreign policy.
Migration Crisis and Weaponized Migration:
Both Yon and Bannon have pointed to the ongoing migration crisis in Central America, particularly along the Darien Gap, as a form of “weaponized migration.” Yon has spent considerable time in Panama and Colombia, observing the movement of migrants through the region. He describes the camps set up in the Darien Gap as fully operational, serving as staging areas for migrants seeking to reach the U.S. southern border. The migrant flow, although reduced compared to previous years, remains a significant challenge for U.S. border security.
Yon and Bannon note that this crisis is being exacerbated by various actors, including the United Nations and various international organizations that support migration efforts. The United States has been attempting to address this issue by possibly opening bases in Panama, a plan that could involve collaboration with local authorities. This issue is compounded by the "push and pull” dynamics of migration, where economic hardship and instability in the migrants’ home countries act as the push factor. At the same time, the perceived opportunities in the U.S. and other destinations serve as the pull factor.
Chinese Influence in Panama:
The role of China in Panama has raised concerns for both Yon and Bannon. According to Yon, Chinese interests are growing in the region, particularly about controlling infrastructure and strategic assets. BlackRock’s potential acquisition of the Hutchison Whampoa terminal, a key part of the Panama Canal logistics network, has sparked alarm. Yon states that while the sale has not gone through yet, Chinese pressure is mounting, with threats against those involved in the transaction.
Bannon also addresses the strategic implications of Chinese influence, including the construction of infrastructure like the “China Bridge” in Panama, a fourth bridge over the Panama Canal. This bridge is strategically located near key ports and could further strengthen China’s regional footprint, allowing it to control critical trade routes. Both Yon and Bannon are concerned that Chinese involvement in Panama could undermine U.S. influence and potentially disrupt the balance of power in the Western Hemisphere.
Panamanian Sentiment and U.S. Response:
Panamanian public sentiment appears divided on U.S. involvement in the region. Yon mentions that while some Panamanians are open to greater U.S. engagement, others are resistant, mainly due to the historical implications of the U.S. controlling the Panama Canal. This division highlights the complexity of U.S. efforts to regain regional influence, especially considering the geo-political dynamics at play.
Conclusion:
Panama remains a critical geopolitical and economic pivot for U.S. national security. The growing Chinese influence and the ongoing migration crisis require urgent attention from U.S. policymakers. As Yon and Bannon suggest, President Trump’s focus on Panama, Greenland, and other strategic areas reflects a broader strategy to protect U.S. interests and secure the homeland against external threats, including weaponized migration and Chinese expansionism. The situation in Panama continues to evolve, with significant implications for U.S. foreign policy and national security moving forward.
