It is difficult to know if Trump has an "illusion of control" or how much the Project 2025 playbook has spoonfed answers, but I believe many of us believe he is too far gone to see anything but illusion instead of reality.
Thank you, Mr. O'Neill, for this report and discussion.
There is an article on this sale, a sale to a consortium, US and Swiss entities, which includes BlackRock, which appears on Reuters news service under the title, "BlackRock to buy Hong Kong firm's Panama Canal port stake amid Trump pressure", By Sabrina Valle, Suzanne McGee and Michael Martina, March 4, 2025.
Maybe Trump has read it, maybe not.
Two questions come to mind when we use the explicit evidence presented in this above source to attempt to find factual understanding BlackRock's decision to participate in the consortium:
if Trump had not made public and a sensational issue of his feelings about the Canal [or if he never gave the Canal or Panama a thought}, would this consortium have emerged as buyer of these global transportation infrastructure assets?;
and, how this participation in purchase by BlackRock perceived by its corporate leaders in the corporate context of sound, even a strategically significant investment?
What are they thinking at BlackRock? Doing business on a global scale and with pressures being continuously exerted on it by competing global political-economic rival regimes [currently China's regime and the US's regime] requires some nimble choices that give both regime's somethings each perceives as necessary or preferred and useful,
while at the same time participating in a transaction that, to its investor communities, appears as a geopolitically and financially astute choice that also understands strategic use of chaos theory to be able to make an investment characterized by very long term probability of profitable operation in the politically-charged global transportation environment [from this Reuters article, the characterization,"a generational investment opportunity."] .
If Trump feels 'vindicated' and proud, then he hasn't accomplished anything but been in a better place at a better time than not. BlackRock needs to work the system, as global corporations do, by having narratives for policies and decisions that can be transactionalized and politically rationalized. So, PRC China also comes out ahead in this deal, because while Trump's can, theoretically, now point to more US less PRC influence on the operation of the Canal by virtue of predominant US corporate presence in ownership of these Canal-linked operations, PRC China can now claim that it can no longer be accused [falsely accused, according to the PRC China official narrative].
The sale also leaves Hong Kong's CK Hutchison, which is making the sale of interest in these port operations entities, with much of its other transportation infrastructure entities, "The sale does not involve any interest in Hutchison Port Holdings Trust, which operates ports in Hong Kong and Shenzhen, as well as South China, or any other ports in Mainland China, CK Hutchison said", as also reported in the Reuters article. Notice also, from this article, that, "CK Hutchison is a publicly listed company not financially tied to the Chinese government, though Hong Kong firms are subject to state oversight."
This is at least a three-entities-'feel good' deal; maybe even the government of Panama senses some small reason to believe some pressure is off,... for now maybe. Again, we read in the Reuters article, "Panama's authorities have announced an audit of CK Hutchison's contract, saying they are investigating its compliance with concession agreements. Panama's attorney general determined earlier this month that CK Hutchison's port contract was "unconstitutional." The Supreme Court in Panama was set to make the final ruling on its legal status."
Trump pointed to not any thing that was happening to curtail or inconvenience US shipping via the Canal; PRC China's Belt and Road Initiative continues its uncertain course and with its state oversight of CK Hutchison's other facilities in "Hong Kong and Shenzhen, as well as South China, [and] other ports in Mainland China". BlackRock looks big and on the move into the future.
Also, BlackRock may reduce US political pressure exerted on it: "In theory the deal, by showing the firm to be acting in Trump's favor, could ease Republican pressure on BlackRock and its CEO, Larry Fink, over its past embrace of the use of environmental, social and governance (ESG) factors in investing. But the company and Fink have remained under attack by Republicans and supporters of Trump's MAGA movement on climate and diversity issues." [again quoted from the Reuters article]
Trump can now make the additional claim that, through his initiative and persuasion, the nothing that had been happening will now be even less likely, at least on his watch. Wonderful policy, policy much in need of justification [from where and by who]. The Canal could silt-in before anyone figures out a reasonable justification.
More importantly, PRC China gets a peak at another of the near-abroads of interest to Trump in his attempted construction of area of geopolitical hegemony and imperial reach-and=rule.
As you note, Mr. O'Neill, "reelection has reinforced his belief that disruption is power, and that every previous caution was unnecessary". Whether anyone or everyone is better off, or not, is not Trump's concern.
It is difficult to know if Trump has an "illusion of control" or how much the Project 2025 playbook has spoonfed answers, but I believe many of us believe he is too far gone to see anything but illusion instead of reality.
My concern is that, when the bluster fails, he will launch a missile and claim he was forced to take drastic action. I believe he IS that unbalanced.
End justifying the means— machiavevelli
Thank you, Mr. O'Neill, for this report and discussion.
There is an article on this sale, a sale to a consortium, US and Swiss entities, which includes BlackRock, which appears on Reuters news service under the title, "BlackRock to buy Hong Kong firm's Panama Canal port stake amid Trump pressure", By Sabrina Valle, Suzanne McGee and Michael Martina, March 4, 2025.
Maybe Trump has read it, maybe not.
Two questions come to mind when we use the explicit evidence presented in this above source to attempt to find factual understanding BlackRock's decision to participate in the consortium:
if Trump had not made public and a sensational issue of his feelings about the Canal [or if he never gave the Canal or Panama a thought}, would this consortium have emerged as buyer of these global transportation infrastructure assets?;
and, how this participation in purchase by BlackRock perceived by its corporate leaders in the corporate context of sound, even a strategically significant investment?
The Reuters article cited above provides some significant useful to evaluate these questions and arrive at additional useful questions and answer sets. Additional evidence appears in "BlackRock - January 14, 2020 "Sustainability as BlackRock’s New Standard for Investing" found at https://www.sec.gov/comments/s7-23-19/s72319-6706471-206111.pdf , and in other published statements, at https://www.blackrock.com/hk/en/products/229547/blackrock-china-fund-a2-usd and titled simply "BlackRock China Fund" .
What are they thinking at BlackRock? Doing business on a global scale and with pressures being continuously exerted on it by competing global political-economic rival regimes [currently China's regime and the US's regime] requires some nimble choices that give both regime's somethings each perceives as necessary or preferred and useful,
while at the same time participating in a transaction that, to its investor communities, appears as a geopolitically and financially astute choice that also understands strategic use of chaos theory to be able to make an investment characterized by very long term probability of profitable operation in the politically-charged global transportation environment [from this Reuters article, the characterization,"a generational investment opportunity."] .
If Trump feels 'vindicated' and proud, then he hasn't accomplished anything but been in a better place at a better time than not. BlackRock needs to work the system, as global corporations do, by having narratives for policies and decisions that can be transactionalized and politically rationalized. So, PRC China also comes out ahead in this deal, because while Trump's can, theoretically, now point to more US less PRC influence on the operation of the Canal by virtue of predominant US corporate presence in ownership of these Canal-linked operations, PRC China can now claim that it can no longer be accused [falsely accused, according to the PRC China official narrative].
The sale also leaves Hong Kong's CK Hutchison, which is making the sale of interest in these port operations entities, with much of its other transportation infrastructure entities, "The sale does not involve any interest in Hutchison Port Holdings Trust, which operates ports in Hong Kong and Shenzhen, as well as South China, or any other ports in Mainland China, CK Hutchison said", as also reported in the Reuters article. Notice also, from this article, that, "CK Hutchison is a publicly listed company not financially tied to the Chinese government, though Hong Kong firms are subject to state oversight."
This is at least a three-entities-'feel good' deal; maybe even the government of Panama senses some small reason to believe some pressure is off,... for now maybe. Again, we read in the Reuters article, "Panama's authorities have announced an audit of CK Hutchison's contract, saying they are investigating its compliance with concession agreements. Panama's attorney general determined earlier this month that CK Hutchison's port contract was "unconstitutional." The Supreme Court in Panama was set to make the final ruling on its legal status."
Trump pointed to not any thing that was happening to curtail or inconvenience US shipping via the Canal; PRC China's Belt and Road Initiative continues its uncertain course and with its state oversight of CK Hutchison's other facilities in "Hong Kong and Shenzhen, as well as South China, [and] other ports in Mainland China". BlackRock looks big and on the move into the future.
Also, BlackRock may reduce US political pressure exerted on it: "In theory the deal, by showing the firm to be acting in Trump's favor, could ease Republican pressure on BlackRock and its CEO, Larry Fink, over its past embrace of the use of environmental, social and governance (ESG) factors in investing. But the company and Fink have remained under attack by Republicans and supporters of Trump's MAGA movement on climate and diversity issues." [again quoted from the Reuters article]
Trump can now make the additional claim that, through his initiative and persuasion, the nothing that had been happening will now be even less likely, at least on his watch. Wonderful policy, policy much in need of justification [from where and by who]. The Canal could silt-in before anyone figures out a reasonable justification.
More importantly, PRC China gets a peak at another of the near-abroads of interest to Trump in his attempted construction of area of geopolitical hegemony and imperial reach-and=rule.
As you note, Mr. O'Neill, "reelection has reinforced his belief that disruption is power, and that every previous caution was unnecessary". Whether anyone or everyone is better off, or not, is not Trump's concern.
Applause, Marie ! A worthy diatribe ... orange man & mushmouth: apt descriptors.
Please continue ... please ...