5
5
0
Does the article capture all of your concerns? Military implications? Environmental ones? Economic ones? Political ones?
Are you unconcerned with these issues?
http://worldif.economist.com/article/8/what-if-the-panama-canal-gets-a-rival-trench-warfare-in-nicaragua
Thoughts from some RP people?
CPT Zachary Brooks, CPT (Join to see), SFC Mark Merino, CW5 (Join to see), 1LT(P) L S, GySgt Wayne A. Ekblad, SSG James J. Palmer IV aka "JP4", TSgt Hunter Logan, LTC Stephen C., TSgt Joshua Copeland, LTC (Join to see), LTC Paul Labrador, PV2 (Join to see), CW3 (Join to see), CPT Aaron Kletzing, LTC Yinon Weiss.
Are you unconcerned with these issues?
http://worldif.economist.com/article/8/what-if-the-panama-canal-gets-a-rival-trench-warfare-in-nicaragua
Thoughts from some RP people?
CPT Zachary Brooks, CPT (Join to see), SFC Mark Merino, CW5 (Join to see), 1LT(P) L S, GySgt Wayne A. Ekblad, SSG James J. Palmer IV aka "JP4", TSgt Hunter Logan, LTC Stephen C., TSgt Joshua Copeland, LTC (Join to see), LTC Paul Labrador, PV2 (Join to see), CW3 (Join to see), CPT Aaron Kletzing, LTC Yinon Weiss.
Foreign Policy
Panama
China
Edited >1 y ago
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 3
3
3
0
Capt Richard I P., it would be a massive undertaking. Such a canal would be over three times the length of the Panama Canal, although admittedly, a large portion would go through Lake Nicaragua (which would still have to be dredged). To me the takeaway from this is to not to underestimate the Republic of China. I couple this with the other "what if Russia attacks NATO country" question. The U.S. needs to be resume its position of strength and leadership on the world stage. We can't be complacent, because China and Russia are not, I guarantee you. Number two.
(3)
(0)
3
3
0
There are several issues which there are no "good" answers for. Are they similar to the issues when the Panama Canal was built? Absolutely!
(3)
(0)
3
3
0
So there are several issues at play here.
The first is just moving product via waterways. Land prevents that. Waterways are just SLOW. Being able to cut a hole through a continent is just a pragmatic approach. However, "is the steak worth the sizzle" when we talk about a second Panama Canal (Nicaragua Canal)?
Would we effectively double the "throughput" or "halve the cost?" How long would it take to make this happen? From a straight Cost/Benefit analysis, we're talking about recouping money towards profit. But we're competing against an already established enterprise which is paid for, and only has operating costs. In essence, one company in the Red vs another in the Black. That just seems like bad business.
Now, if it is a Chinese front for a military operations, that presents other concerns, however that can be dealt with politically or militarily via things like blockades, or just destroying the Canal if deemed a threat.
As for the environmental issues, yes, I do have concerns, but those need to be addressed by Nicaragua.
The first is just moving product via waterways. Land prevents that. Waterways are just SLOW. Being able to cut a hole through a continent is just a pragmatic approach. However, "is the steak worth the sizzle" when we talk about a second Panama Canal (Nicaragua Canal)?
Would we effectively double the "throughput" or "halve the cost?" How long would it take to make this happen? From a straight Cost/Benefit analysis, we're talking about recouping money towards profit. But we're competing against an already established enterprise which is paid for, and only has operating costs. In essence, one company in the Red vs another in the Black. That just seems like bad business.
Now, if it is a Chinese front for a military operations, that presents other concerns, however that can be dealt with politically or militarily via things like blockades, or just destroying the Canal if deemed a threat.
As for the environmental issues, yes, I do have concerns, but those need to be addressed by Nicaragua.
(3)
(0)
Maj William Gambrell
I am confused by your answer...it doesn't answer the article or the question. The fact is...there will be a benefit. There will now be competition in Central America for shipping rights. Ultimately, this creates a better economy, which will hire more of their own citizens. Thus, maybe illegal immigration in the United States slows down.
(0)
(0)
Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS
Maj William Gambrell I'm not sure I follow.
The major implication of the article is the economic benefit that a new canal would bring. That's a "simple" Cost/Benefit analysis. Will a Nicaraguan Canal double the current throughput or half the cost of the Panama Canal. Simply put, it won't, because it will be operating at a Loss, while the the Panama Canal will be operating at a Profit for the first several years of operation. The only way that the cost can be driven down to make it comparable, let along competitive with Panama is to use Chinese Government funding to supplement it. It's not that it can't help shipping concerns, it's that it isn't a financially feasible model to do so.
That presents the political and military concerns, which are "long term" and honestly easily dealt with. First, they (the Chinese) can't build Air Defense around the Canal, because they will get destroyed the first time we even think something like that is going on. Second, if they try to move a sizable fleet into the Atlantic, we can just blockade it using a Carrier Group from the Pacific Fleet. We move a heck of a lot faster than they do. Even if we can't get someone to block it from that side, we can block it from Atlantic side, and they are just stuck inside... or worse case scenario, we block the Canal with them inside as a warning.
The Environment Concerns are frankly "not our problem" as Nicaragua is a Sovereign state, and although it could cause a global issue, it is their land, and they are entitled to do with it as they please just as we do with US land as we please.
As for illegal immigration, Nicaragua is not a country we get a large influx from, as it is relatively stable, compared to nearly every other Central American country.
http://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/ois_ill_pe_2012_2.pdf
The major implication of the article is the economic benefit that a new canal would bring. That's a "simple" Cost/Benefit analysis. Will a Nicaraguan Canal double the current throughput or half the cost of the Panama Canal. Simply put, it won't, because it will be operating at a Loss, while the the Panama Canal will be operating at a Profit for the first several years of operation. The only way that the cost can be driven down to make it comparable, let along competitive with Panama is to use Chinese Government funding to supplement it. It's not that it can't help shipping concerns, it's that it isn't a financially feasible model to do so.
That presents the political and military concerns, which are "long term" and honestly easily dealt with. First, they (the Chinese) can't build Air Defense around the Canal, because they will get destroyed the first time we even think something like that is going on. Second, if they try to move a sizable fleet into the Atlantic, we can just blockade it using a Carrier Group from the Pacific Fleet. We move a heck of a lot faster than they do. Even if we can't get someone to block it from that side, we can block it from Atlantic side, and they are just stuck inside... or worse case scenario, we block the Canal with them inside as a warning.
The Environment Concerns are frankly "not our problem" as Nicaragua is a Sovereign state, and although it could cause a global issue, it is their land, and they are entitled to do with it as they please just as we do with US land as we please.
As for illegal immigration, Nicaragua is not a country we get a large influx from, as it is relatively stable, compared to nearly every other Central American country.
http://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/ois_ill_pe_2012_2.pdf
(1)
(0)
Maj William Gambrell
To start...the US does get a lot of influx from Central America.
Now...as far as protection of the Canal's, if the second were to be completed...doesn't that make our life easy given China is the primary provider of funds for the second??? They fund it and we see benefit by having closer control over their shipments because we know they will use it.
Then there is the third benefit of Central America advancing an economy beyond drugs.
And of course the fourth....the global economy. Competition in the Central America means cheaper shipping for everyone.
And fifth...I am sure I will believe DHS one day, but it will take a long time given the OPM information leaks.
Now...as far as protection of the Canal's, if the second were to be completed...doesn't that make our life easy given China is the primary provider of funds for the second??? They fund it and we see benefit by having closer control over their shipments because we know they will use it.
Then there is the third benefit of Central America advancing an economy beyond drugs.
And of course the fourth....the global economy. Competition in the Central America means cheaper shipping for everyone.
And fifth...I am sure I will believe DHS one day, but it will take a long time given the OPM information leaks.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google