Trump's New Expansionism: From Panama Canal to Greenland and Gaza Strip

Trump's ambitions for territorial control stir up global controversy / AFP

On February 4, 2025, Donald Trump, the 45th President of the United States, sparked widespread debate and concern with his announcement of an aggressive expansionist plan. After meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at the White House, Trump proposed a controversial plan to take control of the Gaza Strip, a region devastated by the Israel-Hamas conflict. He outlined his vision of American leadership in the region, emphasizing that the U.S. would assume responsibility for the territory’s reconstruction and economic revitalization.

Trump’s bold stance came as part of his broader foreign policy narrative, which has included demands for the return of control over the Panama Canal and the acquisition of Greenland. The latest remarks on Gaza mark the third instance in recent months where Trump has made claims to territories or strategic assets in a manner that critics are likening to a new form of American expansionism.

Trump’s rhetoric in the Gaza Strip highlights his self-assured approach to foreign relations, which blends economic prowess with a mindset shaped by his background as a real estate developer. According to Trump, the U.S. would "take over" Gaza, dismantling dangerous unexploded ordnance, leveling the land, demolishing ruined buildings, and offering endless jobs and housing for the local population. His vision suggests that America would transform Gaza into a thriving economic zone under U.S. control, echoing his earlier remarks about reasserting American influence in other parts of the world.

The Global Response and Growing Concerns Over Trump's Expansionist Plans

Trump’s suggestion that the U.S. should take control of Gaza has raised alarm across the international community. Despite his efforts to frame the plan as a solution to the ongoing crisis, critics argue that it shows a profound disregard for international law, sovereignty, and the rights of the Palestinian people. While the Israeli government, including Netanyahu, has been open to such ideas, many Middle Eastern nations have expressed their disapproval. Saudi Arabia, for example, immediately opposed the proposal, warning that it would lead to further instability in the region.

This latest chapter in Trump’s foreign policy ambitions follows his previous moves that have sparked intense discussions about U.S. imperialism. Just a few months ago, Trump suggested that the U.S. should seek to acquire Greenland, a proposal that was met with mixed reactions, including a public rebuff from Denmark, the territory's sovereign power. Similarly, Trump has floated the idea of exerting greater control over the Panama Canal, potentially reducing Panama’s sovereignty in the process. Critics argue that these moves are emblematic of a broader "America First" mentality, where Trump prioritizes U.S. interests, often at the expense of established global norms.

Trump’s expansionist agenda is not solely driven by political or diplomatic considerations but also by his business-oriented mindset. As a former real estate mogul, Trump’s approach to geopolitics is influenced by the logic of property acquisition and development. In Gaza, he envisions transforming the region into a lucrative investment opportunity, even though such proposals fail to account for the complex, longstanding geopolitical issues surrounding Palestinian sovereignty and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

The Risks of Trump's Aggressive Foreign Policy and its Long-Term Implications

While Trump's expansionist proposals have garnered some support within his base, especially among those who align with his "Make America Great Again" (MAGA) mantra, there are significant concerns about the long-term effects of his approach. The idea of forcibly displacing the Palestinian population and unilaterally taking control of a disputed region like Gaza is fraught with risks. These actions could provoke violent resistance, escalate regional conflicts, and damage the U.S.'s standing on the global stage.

Furthermore, Trump’s foreign policy seems to rely on coercion and pressure, bypassing the complex diplomacy that typically governs relations between nations. By disregarding the wishes of other nations, including close allies, and focusing solely on America’s economic and geopolitical interests, Trump risks alienating potential partners and undermining the U.S.'s credibility as a leader in global governance.

The proposed expansionism also raises critical questions about the feasibility and cost of such ventures. Trump's earlier business endeavors relied heavily on the accumulation of capital and the willingness of stakeholders to engage in mutually beneficial agreements. However, the dynamics of international relations are far more complicated. National sovereignty, territorial integrity, and international law are not factors that can be easily negotiated away, especially when they conflict with the interests of other nations.

Conclusion: A Risky Path to U.S. Dominance

As Trump continues to advocate for a more expansionist foreign policy, the potential consequences of his actions grow more concerning. His desire to expand U.S. influence, whether through territorial control of the Gaza Strip, access to Greenland’s resources, or influence over the Panama Canal, represents a shift away from traditional diplomatic approaches. Instead of fostering cooperative international relations, Trump's stance risks undermining long-standing alliances, escalating conflicts, and damaging the global reputation of the United States.

While it is clear that Trump seeks to consolidate American power and influence on the world stage, the means by which he intends to achieve this remain deeply controversial. Whether these ambitions will succeed or ultimately backfire remains to be seen, but it is certain that Trump's "new expansionism" will continue to provoke debate among policymakers, diplomats, and global citizens alike.