• China criticized CK Hutchinson's sale of its Panama port stake, sending shares falling 6.7%.
• The deal is seen as US power politics, sparking national interest concerns in China.
• Analysts view the sale as strategic, reducing geopolitical risks for CK Hutchinson.

China has taken aim at another company it's not happy with, sending its share price sliding.

On Thursday, China's Hong Kong and Macao Affairs Office reposted a commentary from state-owned Ta Kung Pao — a Hong Kong media outlet — that criticized Hong Kong's CK Hutchinson for its decision to sell a major stake in two Panama ports to a consortium led by New York-based BlackRock.

CK Hutchison's shares fell as much as 6.7% on Friday morning — the most since September 2022 — and were 6.2% lower at 2:58  p.m. local time. Its market value is about $23 billion.

The $22.8 billion deal was announced last week after US President Donald Trump hit out at Chinese influence at the Panama Canal and threatened to regain control over the key shipping waterway.

The news came after another multinational company was caught in the ongoing US-China dispute.

On Thursday, the Chinese Commerce Ministry said it had communicated with Walmart over reports that the retail giant had asked suppliers to cut wholesale prices to offset higher US tariffs. A social media account linked to state TV first reported the news and warned that Walmart would face repercussions if the company insisted on squeezing suppliers.

Companies cautioned to 'think carefully'

Ta Kung Pao said the Panama deal demonstrates that the US is using "state power" to encroach on the legitimate rights and interests of other countries and that it's "power politics packaged as 'business behavior.'"

It also criticized CK Hutchinson for being "spineless" and "profit-seeking." The deal disregards national interests and "betrays and sells out all Chinese people," according to the commentary.

It advised companies to "think carefully about what position and side they should stand on."

The company did not immediately respond to a Business Insider request for comment.

Founded by Hong Kong billionaire Li Ka-shing — once Asia's richest man, CK Hutchinson said last week its decision was "purely commercial in nature and wholly unrelated to recent political news reports concerning the Panama Ports."

The development demonstrates how private companies and their business dealings are increasingly getting caught in the crosshairs of intensified US-China geopolitical tensions.

Ta Kung Pao said in its commentary that the US would use the port deal for "political purposes and promote its own political agenda."

"China's shipping and trade here will inevitably be subject to the US," it added.

Despite investor concerns over the deal following Tung Ka Pao's commentary, analysts see the deal as positive for CK Hutchinson.

"It's an astute deal selling to a buyer, ostensibly backed by the Trump administration, at the top of the market, knowing global trade could fall under a new tariff regime," wrote David Blennerhassett, an analyst at Quiddity Advisors who publishes on the Smartkarma platform, on Thursday.

He added that he doesn't expect the company to reverse its decision to sell the ports following the commentary.

Analysts at CreditSights wrote last week that not only is CK Hutchinson selling its assets at an attractive price, it's also removing geopolitical risks associated with its Panama ports.

• Trump has said he wants to again put the Panama Canal under US control, causing a stir.
• The US has a history of intervention in Panama. In 1989, the military invaded it.
• The successful invasion signaled to neighboring countries that the US disregarded state sovereignty.

President Donald Trump has taken a strong interest in seeing the US retake control of the strategic Panama Canal amid growing concerns over Chinese influence.

Trump has signaled that all options are on the table in his Panamanian pursuit and said earlier this month that the US is "going to take it back," or "something very powerful is going to happen."

It's unclear what that might be, but the US has a long history of political and military intervention in Panama, including an invasion nearly 40 years ago that culminated in a dictator being driven out of an embassy with deafening rock music. Operation Just Cause, a 1989 military intervention, saw 26,000 American troops pour into the country.

The lead-up to the invasion

Originally, American interest in controlling the Canal Zone was less about economics and more about naval warships, said Alan McPherson, a professor of US-Latin American relations at Temple University. While the US more or less accepted handing control of the canal over to Panama, it maintained a consistent presence of troops there.

"You could call it whatever you want," McPherson said of the longtime American presence and interest in the canal. "But it was always this imperial enclave."

Weeks before Operation Just Cause launched in late 1989, Panamanian Defense Forces harassed four US troops stationed there, killing one and injuring another. The skirmish wasn't the reason the US invaded, but it fueled tensions.

American officials began to worry that Panama's dictator might be heading toward an alliance with Soviet Russia. The Bush administration wanted to oust dictator Manuel Noriega from power in favor of a democratically elected leader.

Noriega had benefited the US for years before, having served as a secret CIA informant on other regional drug traffickers. He'd grown increasingly powerful, and the Cold War-era American officials feared Noriega would eventually find Communist Soviet Russia to be a better ally than the Americans.

But the idea of a military invasion to push out a dictator didn't appeal to all US government officials.

"What's really interesting is that the United States government was not united on taking out Noriega," McPherson said. "Noriega definitely was a drug dealer, but he was more of like a protector than an actual mover of drugs," he said. His role in the drug trade allowed Panama to function as a facilitator for drug movement by other regional powers, like the Colombians or Cubans.

Because of his deep familiarity with drug networks and proven track record as an informant for other criminals, the CIA and DEA didn't actually want to dismantle Noriega's position, McPherson said. "They opposed any plans for Operation Just Cause."

The US had paid Noriega for information on other networks like the Cubans for decades, said Robert Harding, professor Latin American politics at Valdosta State University, but US officials grew increasingly worried that as Noriega's grip on power held strong he would inch closer to supporting the Russians instead.

Operation Just Cause

In describing Just Cause, Harding says the US "used a hammer to kill a fly."

"The Panamanian Defense Force was only about 3000 [strong] or so. All they had were machine guns and maybe mortars and rocket launchers," he said.

"But we went in there with the stealth fighters and with the helicopter gunships and just completely obliterated not just the [Panamanian Defense Forces], but sections of the city of Panama," he said, sharing that during his visits to Panama, locals have recounted stories to him about the destruction, including seeing mangled bodies in the street during the American bombardment.

A couple of other factors were at play for invading with such overwhelming force, Harding noted, including inklings of "Vietnam syndrome," in part an aversion to military intervention without the tremendous use of force.

Marines and the Army annihilated parts of the city. Navy SEALs kneecapped any possible escape for Noriega by blowing up his yacht and "disabling" his private jet. And to drive Noriega out of his refuge at the Vatican Embassy, US troops played loud, non-stop rock music. The playlist is now available online.

Major military operations lasted only five days, according to the Army, culminating in Noriega's surrender to Americans on January 3, 1990. Eventually, Noriega tired of hearing American rock, including Guns 'n Roses and Van Halen's classic, "Panama."

The aftermath

While the mission was a resounding strategic success and Noriega's removal paved the way for Panamanian democracy, McPherson said the invasion left the international community feeling uneasy.

"It flies against national sovereign, the principle of national sovereignty," McPherson said. "That nations should be able to have whatever kind of leader they want… and dictators can't just be taken out of power at the whim of a foreign power."

"It degrades the value of national sovereignty," he said. "And so that's the sort of legal and political problem with it."

Washington, however, embraced a different lesson from the Panama invasion and applied it to future military operations and warfighting campaigns, including the Global War on Terror.

• I went on a 13-day partial transit of the Panama Canal on the Holland America Line Rotterdam.
• I booked an interior room to save money, and I'm glad I did it.
• I spent very little time in my room and never missed out on incredible views.

My grandmother was an avid cruiser who went on more than 100 voyages during her retirement. The one cruise she absolutely insisted I do, though, was a Panama Canal crossing.

These sailings are popular (and often expensive) because they offer a rare chance to pass through the Panama Canal and see how its incredible 12-lock system helps ships travel between the Atlantic and Pacific.

So, following her recommendation, I booked a 12-night partial transit of the Panama Canal on the Holland America Line Rotterdam.

I decided to recreate her experience with one exception: She sailed in a balcony room, and I always book interior cabins. The cruise cost me $849 plus $460 for taxes, fees, and port charges.

Here's why I have no regrets about choosing an interior room on such a scenic voyage.

First of all, booking an interior room saved me money.

As with most cruises, the interior cabin was the cheapest option available to book.

On this sailing, an interior cabin can cost about $600 less per person than an ocean-view room and about $800 less than one with a verandah.

My 160-square-foot cabin was comfortable and had all the essentials for a cruise, from a comfy bed to a decent bathroom. It felt fairly spacious, too.

The number of scenic days didn't justify the added cost of a balcony or window.

The cruise lasted 13 days in total. Six of those were spent at ports and five at sea.

This means that exterior-cabin passengers paid extra to see just the open sea for nearly half of the cruise.

An exterior stateroom is not necessary to get the best views on any cruise.

Most cruise ships have numerous public spaces where travelers can enjoy the view as they travel. This ship was no exception, and I found a few excellent places from which I could view the Panama Canal.

Some passengers prefer to see the locks from multiple vantage points, which could also be easily achieved from public spaces on the ship.

In my opinion, some of the best views of the locks were at the ship's Crow's Nest lounge on Deck 12.

Passengers even got access to special sightseeing areas.

On the day we entered the Panama Canal, the captain opened the ship's usually-off-limits bow at 6 a.m.

This allowed passengers to assemble on the bow before entering the Agua Clara locks. The line formed hours before the bow opened, and this area remained accessible all day. The crew even set up light refreshments for us to enjoy while waiting for the iconic views.

The bow had some of the best views of the Panama Canal, and I would've missed out on them if I'd been sitting on the balcony of a private cabin.

I was active on the cruise because I didn't want to spend too much time alone in my interior cabin.

Cruising solo in any interior stateroom often motivates me to be social, get active, and explore more of the ship.

I found myself leaving my cabin often to enjoy the thermal spa, relax at the dome-covered pool, and get in my steps while enjoying sunset views from the jogging track looped around the Sun Deck.

Overall, I think I had a better experience because of my budget stateroom.

On most cruises, I spend so little time in my cabin — and this sailing was no exception.

Since I couldn't watch the Panama Canal transit from a private porthole or balcony, I was compelled to get up before sunrise and bond with other passengers as we cruised.

Not only did I maximize my experience, but also I made new friends while enjoying some of the best views at sea.

Plus, by choosing the cheapest cruise room available, I saved money I can put toward other future travels.

• The Panama Canal Authority chief said giving preferential treatment to one country's ships would lead to "chaos."
• Ricaurte Vásquez Morales told The Wall Street Journal: "Rules are rules — and there are no exceptions."
• Trump has accused the canal authority of charging "exorbitant" fees to US ships.

Giving US ships preferential rates to navigate the Panama Canal would "lead to chaos," the head of the canal authority said.

"Rules are rules — and there are no exceptions," Ricaurte Vásquez Morales told The Wall Street Journal on Wednesday.

"We cannot discriminate for the Chinese, or the Americans, or anyone else. This will violate the neutrality treaty, international law and it will lead to chaos."

In a news conference at Mar-a-Lago on Tuesday, President-elect Donald Trump demanded that US vessels be given preferential treatment.

He also accused the authority of overcharging US ships and of separately seeking funding from the US to repair the waterway. Vásquez Morales denied both those claims, telling the Journal that the authority funds maintenance from the fees it charges and that Panama hadn't requested funding from the US for improvements.

Ships are charged between $300,000 and $1 million depending on their size and type to pass through the canal.

Those charges "apply to all ships from around the world and there are no exceptions," Vásquez Morales told the Journal.

Trump has repeatedly floated the idea of retaking control of the canal, calling the fees "exorbitant" and a "rip-off."

"The fees being charged by Panama are ridiculous, especially knowing the extraordinary generosity that has been bestowed to Panama by the US," he said on Truth Social in December.

At Tuesday's news conference, Trump also downplayed Panama's control of the canal and refused to rule out using military force to retake control of the trade route, expanding on a threat he made last month.

"China's basically taken it over. China's at both ends of the Panama Canal. China's running the Panama Canal," the president-elect said.

Vásquez Morales told the Journal: "China has no involvement whatsoever in our operations."

In response to Trump's comments, Panamanian Foreign Minister Javier Martínez-Acha said on Tuesday that only Panamanians operated the canal, adding: "Our canal's sovereignty is not negotiable and is part of our history of struggle and an irreversible conquest."

Trump has also refused to rule out using military force to take control of Greenland, which he said the US needed for "national security purposes."

The 51-mile Panama Canal was officially opened in 1914, creating a new trade route between the Atlantic and Pacific oceans.

The US transferred control to the state-owned Panama Canal Authority in 1999 in accordance with the Torrijos-Carter Treaties, initiated in 1977 by the Carter administration.

Under the treaty, the US has the right to defend the canal from any change to its neutrality.

• Trump wouldn't rule out using military force to take Greenland and retake the Panama Canal.
• The president-elect made the remarks during a major press conference just days before his 2nd term.
• Denmark has emphatically stated that Greenland isn't for sale.

President-elect Donald Trump isn't ruling out using military force in an effort to gain control of Greenland and retake control of the Panama Canal.

During a Tuesday press conference, Trump was asked if he'd assure the world that he wouldn't use military or economic coercion to secure the sovereign territory and the vital waterway, respectively.

The president-elect in his response reinforced the critical economic importance that he sees in Greenland and the Panama Canal.

"I can't assure you," he said. "I'm not going to commit to that. It might be that you'll have to do something."

"We need Greenland for national security purposes," he continued. "People don't even know if Denmark has any legal right to it. But if they do, they should give it up."

Late last year, Trump spoke about possibly taking back control of the Panama Canal from Panama as well as his wish to secure Greenland from Denmark. He also floated buying Greenland in 2019.

Trump during Tuesday's press conference also threatened to "tariff Denmark at a very high level" if the country didn't give up control of Greenland.

Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen of Denmark earlier on Tuesday said that "Greenland belongs to the Greenlanders," adding that the strategic Arctic island is "not for sale."

Greenland is a Danish colony, though it has had self-rule since 1979. Greenland could declare its independence but would need to hold a formal vote first. Greenlandic Prime Minister Múte Egede said recently that it was "time to take the next step for our country," hinting at the possibility of a referendum this year.

As for the Panama Canal, the Carter Administration signed a treaty in 1977 that began a process that led to Panama taking full control of the canal in 1999. Last month, Panamanian President José Raúl Mulino said in a statement that his nation controls "every square meter of the Panama Canal and its adjacent area."

Shortly after, Trump responded on Truth Social by stating, "We'll see about that," and then posted a photo with the caption, "Welcome to the United States Canal!"

Business Insider has reached out to representatives of Trump for comment.

• Trump said the US should take control of Greenland, reigniting an old position of his.
• This came shortly after he also suggested the US could take over the Panama Canal.
• In 2019, Trump said the US should buy Greenland, an idea swiftly rejected by the island and Denmark.

President-elect Donald Trump has resurfaced an old position of his, that the US should take over Greenland, just hours after also threatening to take over the Panama Canal.

Trump wrote on Truth Social on Monday that "for purposes of National Security and Freedom throughout the World, the United States of America feels that the ownership and control of Greenland is an absolute necessity."

He made the comments in a post announcing the PayPal cofounder Ken Howery as his choice for US Ambassador to Denmark.

Greenland, the world's largest island, is an autonomous dependent territory of Denmark, which is a US ally and NATO member.

Trump's pronouncement came just hours after he threatened to take control of the Panama Canal, the man-made waterway connecting the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans.

Trump wrote on Truth Social on Monday that "the fees being charged by Panama are ridiculous, especially knowing the extraordinary generosity that has been bestowed to Panama by the US."

He added, "This complete 'rip-off' of our Country will immediately stop."

In a separate post, Trump wrote: "If the principles, both moral and legal, of this magnanimous gesture of giving are not followed, then we will demand that the Panama Canal be returned to us, in full, and without question."

"To the Officials of Panama, please be guided accordingly!" he added.

The US transferred control of the canal to the Panama Canal Authority in 1999 under a treaty signed in 1977 by President Jimmy Carter.

Panama charges fees for each vessel going through the canal, making it an important economic driver for the country.

Greenland, too, has strategic value. In addition to its own natural resources, it has proximity to the Arctic, where countries such as Russia are vying to gain resources and control.

Trump expressed an interest in the US buying Greenland in 2019, during his first term in office. Greenland's government quickly rejected the idea, saying that it wasn't for sale.

• President-elect Donald Trump has threatened to retake control of the Panama Canal.
• Trump blasted the "exorbitant" fees charged to US vessels using the canal.
• Panama's president responded on X, saying that "every square meter" of the canal belongs to Panama.

President-elect Donald Trump has threatened to retake control of the Panama Canal as he hit out at what he called the "exorbitant" fees charged to US ships traversing the passage.

Panama charges tariffs for vessels traveling through the iconic waterway, with fees varying by size and purpose.

"The fees being charged by Panama are ridiculous, especially knowing the extraordinary generosity that has been bestowed to Panama by the US," Trump said in a post on Truth Social, adding: "This complete 'rip-off' of our Country will immediately stop."

The US transferred control of the canal to the Panama Canal Authority (PCA) in 1999 in accordance with the Torrijos-Carter Treaties.

"If the principles, both moral and legal, of this magnanimous gesture of giving are not followed, then we will demand that the Panama Canal be returned to us, in full, and without question," Trump continued in a separate post. "To the Officials of Panama, please be guided accordingly!"

Panama President José Raúl Mulino responded in a video statement on X, stating that "every square meter of the Panama Canal and its adjacent zones" belongs to Panama.

The president held up a red book titled "Torrijos Carter Treaty" as he referenced the 1977 agreement that would lead to the dissolution of the Panama Canal Zone and hand over the canal to Panamanians on December 31, 1999.

The roughly 80-kilometer (around 50 miles) canal was officially opened in 1914, offering a new link between the Atlantic and Pacific oceans.

According to the PCA's website, between 13,000 and 14,000 ships use the waterway each year, "connecting 1,920 ports across 170 countries." The United States is the largest user of the canal.

In 2023, a shipping company paid almost $4 million on top of regular fees to get through the Panama Canal following a logjam, Bloomberg reported.

Japan's Eneos Group paid $3.98 million in an auction to jump the queue after a drought caused congestion, the report said.