A Potential New Battle: UN vs US over Greenland and the Panama Canal

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio with Panamanian President José Raúl Mulino in Panama last week. Credit: US Embassy, Panamaby Thalif Deen (united nations)Tuesday, February 04, 2025Inter Press Service

Kul Gautam, a former UN Assistant Secretary-General and Deputy Executive Director of the UN children’s fund UNICEF, told IPS Donald Trump’s threat to buy or take over Greenland, the autonomous territory of Denmark, and to take back the Panama Canal “by military force, if necessary”, harks back to the bygone era of the 18th and 19th-century world of lawless, imperial, and colonial expansion.

“It should be seen in the context of Trump’s grandiose announcement to pursue America’s “Manifest Destiny” that was once invoked as the divinely ordained right of the United States to expand its borders to the Pacific Ocean and beyond.”

Such imperial ambition appeals to Trump’s “America First” MAGA supporters but is clearly illegal and in defiance of the UN Charter and a complete violation of the territorial integrity and sovereignty of UN member states, he pointed out.

“Given Trump’s hubris, erratic nature, and disregard for both domestic and international law, his threat must be taken seriously.”

If Trump dares to acquire Greenland and the Panama Canal forcefully, he said, the UN, EU, OAS, and other groups will all denounce such aggression but will be unable to counter him effectively in the short run.

“But in the long run, Trump’s policies and actions will alienate America’s closest allies. The US will be isolated globally to the advantage of its adversaries like China and Russia,” Gautam declared.

Any takeover will be in defiance of the UN charter and in complete violation of the territorial integrity and sovereignty of UN member states.

According to the United Nations Charter, described as one of the world’s most viewed founding documents of the UN, “all member states must respect the sovereignty of other states”. It also prohibits the use of force against the political independence or territorial integrity of other states.

But where will the UN stand against a military superpower-- while the world body does not have the means to enforce its own resolutions?

And it harks back to the US invasion of Iraq in March 2003-- despite opposition at the UN-- in search of weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) that did not exist?

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio with Panamanian President José Raúl Mulino in Panama last week. Credit: US Embassy, Panama

Dr Alon Ben-Meir, a retired professor of international relations, most recently at the Center for Global Affairs at New York University (NYU), told IPS it is not only Democrats but also many of Trump’s supporters are baffled by his arbitrary decision to take another country’s territory by force if he “has to,” such as Greenland and the Panama Canal, which is outrageous to even think about.

“Is there one single sane Trump advisor who can tell him that what he is thinking is a gross violation of international law, to unilaterally decide to take over any land that belongs to other countries?”

In addition, said Dr Ben-Meir, it is terrifying other countries, creating a dreadful feeling about what the United States represents and the harm it can inflict at this point on other states.

“To suggest that the US can unilaterally take land from a UN member state, or worse yet, in the case of Greenland, a NATO member state is nothing short of folly—to take by force land from one’s allies.”

The US, he pointed out, is committed to upholding territorial integrity, and to think that Trump can just take over the Panama Canal and invade Denmark’s territory is the highest of absurdity.

“Sadly, with the new Trump administration entering a second term, not only does the UN face an exceptionally hostile White House, but even many of the US’ friends and allies are bewildered and greatly concerned about what he might do next. They fear that nothing good will come out of this Trump administration and are bracing for the worst.”

Trump must remember that America First is best served when America is respected, not feared, he declared.

Asked about the proposed take-over of the Panama Canal and Greenland, UN Deputy Spokesperson Farhan Haq said last week: ”When it comes to any of these questions involving actual Member States' territory, obviously, we are governed, as you know, by the UN Charter.”

“And you know that the UN Charter stands for the respect of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Member States. And all Member States and their sovereignty and territorial integrity must be respected,” he said.

Elaborating further, Gautam said throughout human history, dominant imperial powers often felt that their military and economic might justify the equivalent of their “manifest destiny” and unchecked power.

“But we have now entered an era of interdependence and the need to follow a rules-based international order that the US helped craft after World War II. However, the imperial hangover still persists among certain segments of the political class in the US, as well as in Putin’s Russia, Erdogan’s Türkiye, and a few other old empires,” he pointed out.

As the Trump mania is not going to last forever, said Gautam, “I hope and expect that saner voices in favour of a mutually beneficial, rule-based international order will prevail again in the US and elsewhere”.

If human civilization is to survive and thrive, there is no choice but to follow the path of peaceful coexistence and interdependence where healthy competition is cherished but bullying by the powerful is frowned upon, he declared.

Meanwhile, in a Q&A in Panama City last week, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio justified the Panama Canal take-over by arguing that it is “completely unacceptable” that Hong Kong-based companies are having control over the entry and exit points of the canal. That cannot continue, he said

“And if there’s a conflict and China tells them, do everything you can to obstruct the canal so that the U.S. can’t engage in trade and commerce, so that the U.S. military and naval fleet cannot get to the Indo-Pacific fast enough, they would have to do it. They would have to do it, and they would do it. And now we’d have a major problem on our hands. That’s number one.”

Number two, “we have to talk about the fact that we built this thing. We paid for it. Thousands of people died doing this – Americans. And somehow our naval vessels who go through there, and American shipping that goes through there, pays rates some cases higher than other countries are paying – for example, a vessel from China. That’s also not acceptable”.

It was a terrible deal when it was made, it should never have been allowed.

“They’re going to tell you that it’s set by an independent administrative entity and not the government; that’s their internal problem. They’ll have to figure that out. But we should not be in a position of having to pay more than other countries. In fact, we should be getting a discount or maybe for free, because we paid for the thing,” declared Rubio.

IPS UN Bureau Report

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau

Follow IPS News UN Bureau on Instagram

© Inter Press Service (2025) — All Rights ReservedOriginal source: Inter Press Service