Panama Canal boss says MSC ports deal threatens neutrality, Infra News, ET Infra
Advt
The sale of two ports near the Panama Canal to a global consortium led by Mediterranean Shipping Company (MSC) threatens the canal's principle of neutrality, the canal's head Ricaurte Vasquez told the Financial Times."There is a potential risk of capacity concentration if the deal comes the way it is structured as we understand right now," Vasquez told the FT in a report published on Tuesday."If there is a significant level of concentration on terminal operators belonging to an integrated or one single shipping company, it will be at the expense of Panama's competitiveness in the market and inconsistent with neutrality."MSC is one of the world's top container shipping groups. MSC and the Panama Canal Authority did not immediately respond to a Reuters request for comment. CK Hutchison confirmed last month that MSC, run by the family of Italian billionaire Gianluigi Aponte , was the main investor in a group seeking to buy 43 ports, including the two ports in Panama, for $22.8 billion.The clarification follows weeks of scrutiny and criticism in China over CK Hutchison's plan to sell the ports to a consortium, which was previously led by US investment firm BlackRock . BlackRock remains part of the group.The proposed sale has also drawn the attention of US President Donald Trump , who has repeatedly expressed his desire to reduce Chinese influence around the Panama Canal and termed the deal a "reclaiming" of the waterway after it was first announced.In April, China's top market regulator said it was paying close attention to CK Hutchison's planned sale and that parties to the deal should not try to avoid an antitrust review.Vasquez added that the canal should use the ports deal as an opportunity to become a terminal operator itself by reactivating a project to build a terminal in the Port of Corozal at the Pacific end of the canal, according to the FT.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
18 minutes ago
- Mint
The US and China Are Talking Again. Don't Call It a Reset
Trade negotiations between the US and China in London mark a cautious step toward easing tensions, but not a new beginning. It's a short-term strategy to avoid further deterioration — a fragile truce that could be reversed at any moment. At the core is a deeper issue: National security. Both sides now view trade through that lens, and handshakes won't fix it. Washington must recognize that Beijing seeks respect and won't accept a one-sided, long-term deal. China, for its part, needs to understand that it won't be business as usual — and that the US will expect more concessions and market access to the world's second-largest economy. The alternative is continued hostility, which will make for a more chaotic global trade environment, and a more dangerous world. The London climbdown is positive, but precarious. Rapprochement has turned into recrimination before. After the initial euphoria of a trade-war ceasefire agreed in Geneva in May, both sides accused the other of reneging on a deal to temporarily lower tariffs that had climbed well above 100%. Now negotiators say they've reached an agreement in principle on a framework to deescalate trade tensions, based on the consensus forged in Geneva. Delegations from both sides will take the proposal back to their respective leaders, following nearly 20 hours of talks over two days. 'Once the presidents approve it, we will then seek to implement it,' US Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said. The full details of the accord weren't immediately available, but US officials said they 'absolutely expect' that issues around shipments of rare earth minerals and magnets will be resolved. There are no winners or losers coming out of this, notes Steve Okun, founder and chief executive officer of AC Advisors. The fundamental questions are much larger than any round of talks. 'The Trump administration needs to decide whether it views Beijing as a strategic competitor, or an existential threat,' he told me. 'Washington can take the economic hit from a trade war, but politically, Xi Jinping can suffer the hit for longer than Trump can. So one side has economic leverage, and the other political leverage — that's a standstill, for now.' The Chinese president is biding his time, despite a sluggish economy. In the most recent sign of how the trade war is hurting, exports rose less than expected last month. The worst drop in US-bound shipments since February 2020 — the outbreak of the pandemic — counteracted strong demand from elsewhere. Still, sales to other markets are providing much-needed support for an economy stuck in deflation and struggling with weak domestic demand. Beijing is sticking to its narrative that this trade war is Washington's problem, and that China is being unfairly targeted. A recent Xinhua commentary warned that America's security-focused view of economic issues risks undermining global cooperation. There is a pathway to peaceful coexistence, but compromises are required, notes Ryan Hass of the Brookings Institution. To break through with Xi, Trump will need to acknowledge that both countries are major powers. Neither can dictate terms to the other. Both would be hurt by high tariffs on each other's goods — but on their own, they're not enough to force capitulation. The US public has no appetite for a broader conflict with Beijing. Disapproval of China's behavior may be high, but the top priority is still to avoid war. Americans are clear in their desire to manage competition without that escalating into open conflict. For that to happen, Washington must recognize that Beijing craves respect. The US would be wise to pay heed to the Chinese concept of mianzi or 'face' — Xi will only agree to a long-term deal that he can pitch at home and abroad as a win. Beijing has taken lessons from Trump's first trade war, and judged that agreement to be one-sided in favor of Washington. It won't make that mistake again. China doesn't always like reciprocating face, but officials would be wise to give some to Trump, too. His tariffs have been outlandish, but his supporters also demand that he show strength, not concession. Beijing should be able to understand what happens when politicians need to cater to public pressure. Neither side has the upper hand to make the other come away an obvious loser. At the most, the London talks might have achieved just enough to help shape the future on a less-hostile basis. That in itself is progress — but it would be a mistake to call this moment a reset. More From Bloomberg Opinion: This column reflects the personal views of the author and does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners. Karishma Vaswani is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering Asia politics with a special focus on China. Previously, she was the BBC's lead Asia presenter and worked for the BBC across Asia and South Asia for two decades. This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Trade breakthrough: US, China agree on 'framework' to ease trade tensions; 'we feel positive'
The United States and China have agreed on a framework to move forward on trade, marking a potential turning point in the prolonged 'trade war' between the two nations. The announcement came after two days of talks at London's Lancaster House. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now 'We have reached a framework to implement the Geneva consensus,' said US Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick. While the plan still requires approval from both presidents, Lutnick expressed confidence that issues such as rare earth exports would be resolved. 'Once the presidents approve it, we will then seek to implement it,' he said. US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer said the US was moving 'as quickly as we can,' adding: 'We feel positive about engaging with the Chinese.' 'I think the talks are going really, really well,' Lutnick told reporters during the discussions, which lasted nearly 20 hours. 'Everybody's got their head down working closely.' Talks resumed in London after President Donald Trump and President Xi Jinping spoke by phone last week, attempting to put relations back on track. Trump said he wants to 'open up China' to US products, warning, 'If we don't open up China, maybe we won't do anything.' China's lead negotiator Li Chenggang confirmed both sides would now consult their respective leaders.
Time of India
2 hours ago
- Time of India
Byju's sells US-based arms at steep discount
Bengaluru: Byju's has sold its US-based subsidiaries, Epic and Tynker, as part of US bankruptcy proceedings, in what appears to be a fire sale. This marks the latest step in the Indian edtech company's asset liquidation following its financial collapse. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now Epic was acquired for $95 million by the Chinese education firm TAL Education Group, while CodeHS purchased Tynker for $2.2 million in cash, according to court filings. Both transactions were approved by US Bankruptcy Judge Brendan Shannon on May 20 and are intended to help lenders recoup losses from a $1.2 billion term loan extended to Byju's. Tynker was acquired by Byju's in 2021 for a reported $200 million, while Epic was bought the same year for about $500 million. The latest sale values underscore the sharp write-downs now facing the company's global portfolio. According to a report by EdWeek Market Brief, Tynker's latest sale followed 48 rounds of competitive bidding between CodeHS, operating through a newly formed entity called Tynker Holdings, and another party, Future Minds. CodeHS CEO Jeremy Keeshin, identified in court as the sole member of Tynker Holdings, said the acquisition would allow the company to support learners as they progress from basic coding tools to advanced computer science content. Epic's sale faced an eleventh-hour intervention from the US Department of Justice, which flagged the potential need for a CFIUS (Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States) review due to the buyer's Chinese ownership, court records show. Judge Shannon described the episode as a "fire drill," though the transaction ultimately received approval. Both sales are being overseen by a court-appointed trustee managing the asset disposal on behalf of creditors. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now Byju's, once valued at $22 billion, is now facing insolvency proceedings in India over non-payment of dues, while its international operations are being dismantled through US bankruptcy court. TOI previously reported that the asset sales form part of a larger restructuring effort as Byju's attempts to navigate legal, regulatory, and financial pressures following its aggressive global acquisition spree. Other subsidiaries, such as Aakash, remain under scrutiny amid separate legal proceedings.
