Chuck Holton
Politics • Culture • News
BlackRock’s Panama Ports Buyout
A Shift in Power, But At What Cost?
March 05, 2025

In one of the biggest infrastructure deals in recent history, BlackRock and its partners have purchased control of the Panama Ports Company (PPC) for $22.8 billion, taking over the management of two critical ports at either end of the Panama Canal. The deal removes Hong Kong-based CK Hutchison Holdings, a company with deep connections to China, from managing these ports—seemingly a win for U.S. influence in the region.

But while this deal shifts control away from a China-linked company, it also hands even more power to BlackRock, a massive investment firm that already has an outsized role in shaping global business and government policies. The question we should be asking is: Does this really reduce foreign influence in Panama, or does it just transfer it to a different kind of global giant?

Who (or What) Is BlackRock?

BlackRock isn’t just another investment firm—it’s the largest asset manager in the world, controlling a staggering $11.5 trillion in assets. To put that into perspective:

  • That’s more than five times the size of Russia’s entire economy.
  • If BlackRock were a country, its financial power would make it the 3rd largest economy on Earth, ahead of Japan, Germany, and the UK.
  • It has more financial influence than most governments and controls major stakes in companies like Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, and ExxonMobil.

But BlackRock doesn’t just invest—it influences. Through its vast holdings in publicly traded companies, it has the ability to push corporate policies, steer industries, and even shape government decisions. This power has led to concerns that BlackRock is a shadow government in its own right, accountable only to itself and its shareholders.

The Panama Ports Buyout: What It Means

BlackRock’s takeover of the Panama Canal’s key ports isn’t just about business—it’s about geopolitics. These ports control much of the traffic passing through one of the world’s most strategic waterways, giving whoever manages them an enormous advantage in global trade.

The buyout does remove CK Hutchison Holdings, a company with ties to China, which has eased concerns from U.S. policymakers about potential Chinese espionage or military use of the ports. But here’s the catch:

This doesn’t mean China is losing influence in Panama or Latin America.

  • China still has deep economic ties with Panama, including major infrastructure projects and trade agreements.
  • Beijing continues to fund massive projects across Latin America, from railways to power plants, ensuring its long-term presence.
  • If China wants port access, it can still use other state-owned companies like COSCO to secure new logistics hubs in the region.

So while this deal shifts control away from China-linked Hutchison, it doesn’t eliminate China’s influence—it just redistributes power in a different way.

Why BlackRock’s Influence Is a Bigger Concern

While BlackRock isn’t a foreign government, its power is just as concerning in many ways. Here’s why:

1. BlackRock controls more money than almost any nation.

💰 With $11.5 trillion in assets, BlackRock manages more wealth than every country in the world except the U.S. and China.

2. It has a major stake in nearly every major corporation.

🏢 BlackRock owns significant shares in Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Google, and nearly every Fortune 500 company.

3. It can influence corporate policies behind closed doors.

📝 Because of its massive holdings, BlackRock can push companies to adopt policies aligned with its goals—whether it’s on climate, diversity, or governance.

4. It has deep connections with the U.S. government.

🏛️ Former BlackRock executives have held top positions in the Biden administration, leading to accusations of a “revolving door” between Wall Street and Washington.

5. It is one of the largest landlords in America.

🏠 BlackRock has invested billions in real estate, buying up homes and raising housing prices for regular people.

6. It pushes controversial “ESG” policies.

🌍 BlackRock promotes “Environmental, Social, and Governance” (ESG) policies, influencing corporate decisions on climate and diversity—whether investors agree or not.

7. It operates with little transparency.

🕵️ Unlike elected governments, BlackRock is accountable only to itself and its investors, not to the public.

8. It is expanding its control over global infrastructure.

🚢 The Panama ports deal is part of a larger BlackRock strategy to buy up critical infrastructure, including power plants and railways.

9. It can shift economic policies without public input.

📉 By pulling investments from certain industries (like fossil fuels), BlackRock can steer entire economies—without voters having a say.

10. Governments are now dependent on it.

🌐 Because BlackRock manages pension funds and government assets, even world leaders have to consider its interests.

What’s the Real Takeaway?

Yes, this deal prevents a China-linked company from running the Panama Canal’s major ports, and that’s a big deal. But at what cost? We’ve simply shifted control from one foreign influence to another—one that’s just as powerful but far less accountable.

China isn’t really losing ground in Latin America—it still has deep economic roots in Panama and beyond. Meanwhile, BlackRock continues to grow its empire, quietly amassing influence over global commerce, national economies, and even government policies.

This deal might be a strategic move for U.S. influence in the region, but it also raises serious concerns about corporate power, economic sovereignty, and the unchecked influence of global finance. If BlackRock keeps expanding its control over strategic assets like ports, energy, and infrastructure, we may soon find ourselves in a world where corporations—not countries—set the rules of global trade and governance.

So while this is a win for the U.S. government, it may also be a step toward an even bigger problem: the concentration of global power in the hands of a few unelected corporate giants.

🔹 The question we should all be asking: If BlackRock already has more financial influence than most countries, how much more control are we willing to give it?

community logo
Join the Chuck Holton Community
To read more articles like this, sign up and join my community today
14
What else you may like…
Videos
Podcasts
Posts
Articles
Is the U.S. Training Syria’s New Jihadist Army?

Very few media outlets are talking about this, but they should be — urgently.

While most of the world is distracted, U.S. troops are conducting live training exercises in Syria with the forces of the country’s new interim government, now led by Ahmed al-Sharaa — a man widely known as a former Al Qaeda affiliate.

Let that sink in.

Recent reports confirm that U.S. personnel at the Al-Tanf garrison have been training members of the so-called 70th Division, a unit formed from remnants of the Syrian Free Army, which now pledges loyalty to this new government. This comes right on the heels of a massacre of Druze civilians, allegedly carried out by those very same government-aligned forces.

Aiding the Next Generation of Jihadists?
This isn’t just a questionable policy — it could be morally catastrophic.

Druze communities, who have long sought neutrality in Syria’s civil war, were brutally attacked.

Christian populations in the region are living in fear, as radical factions become emboldened ...

00:06:03
Debunked

Debunked: Following several accusations that Israel is causing famine in Gaza, COGAT has released drone footage of the hundreds of truckloads of supplies waiting to be delivered to Gaza by the UN. A statement accompanying the footage claims that 'There is enough food here to feed all of Gaza, if the UN ever came to pick it up.

00:00:39
Did Jewish Settlers Burn a Church?

See for yourself

00:02:32
Episode 622 - Field Producer Dennis Azato and Chuck Reminisce

My erstwhile field producer and cameraman Dennis Azato has accompanied me on ten years of adventures across the globe. Today he joins me in Ukraine and we spend some time remembering our many trips together.

Episode 622 - Field Producer Dennis Azato and Chuck Reminisce
The Hot Zone Hit 200k Subscribers!

We just passed 200000 subscribers on YouTube! If you've ever shared a video, left a comment, or prayed over this work, thank you. I don’t take it lightly. This channel exists to bring truth and to make the news better, and it is made possible by all of you. Thank you!

post photo preview
Interview With Freed Israeli Hostage Mia Shem.

Lest we forget why Israel is fighting daily to bring their people home and protect against further atrocities, Mia Shem’s story is a sobering reminder of what’s at stake.

Chuck, I keep hearing that Israel and the US are preparing to put US troops on the ground along side the IDF in order to export the Palestinian population out of Gaza so Israel can rebuild the area.
What do you know about this? Do you see the same thing happening?
If not, why the US troop buildup in the area?

post photo preview
Israel at a Crossroads: Conquer, Besiege, or Capitulate?

Hey folks, Chuck Holton here—coming to you one last time from this balcony in Jerusalem before I head to Tel Aviv and then on to the next frontlines. But before I leave, I want to break down some of the most critical developments from the past week in Gaza and beyond. And believe me, there's a lot to unpack.

Three Roads for Israel

Let’s talk strategy. An analysis in Israel Hayom outlines three main options Israel faces in Gaza:

  1. Conquer Gaza: Full military occupation, boots on the ground, control every inch. But that comes at a high cost—thousands of IDF troops deployed indefinitely.

  2. Besiege Gaza: Maintain pressure without full occupation. This could include arming anti-Hamas factions—like Abu Salai’s clan in Rafah—and continuing selective strikes.

  3. Status Quo: Keep doing what they’re doing—limited incursions, hostage negotiations, and intelligence gathering. But this risks being perceived as weak and prolonging the conflict indefinitely.

As I said on Newsmax, the idea of a ceasefire right now is fantasy. Hamas still believes it’s winning—happy to let their people starve if they can pin the blame on Israel. President Trump nailed it:

“You’re gonna have to fight. You’re gonna have to clean it up. You’re gonna have to get rid of them.”

Only for Supporters
To read the rest of this article and access other paid content, you must be a supporter
Read full Article
post photo preview
Feeding the Hungry—or Fueling the Narrative? What’s Really Stopping Aid in Gaza

Just inside the border fence between Israel and Gaza, 950 trucks loaded with humanitarian aid are parked in neat rows—each one carrying enough food to feed 5,000 people. That’s nearly 4.7 million meals sitting idle in the blistering sun, not because they can’t be delivered, but because the United Nations refuses to distribute them. The reason? Doing so would mean cooperating with the Israel Defense Forces (IDF), and apparently, political posturing takes priority over feeding the hungry.

 

I was there. I saw the trucks. I spoke with the IDF officers overseeing the process. The KM Shalom distribution yard is not a ghost town—it's an active, secure checkpoint where aid is being processed, inspected, and prepared for delivery. The Israeli military has opened the door for humanitarian efforts to operate safely. But the UN has effectively slammed it shut, choosing ideological purity over practical compassion.

The prevailing media narrative often accuses Israel of “blocking aid” into Gaza. But here’s the truth on the ground: Israel isn’t blocking humanitarian aid—Hamas is looting it, and the UN is refusing to cooperate to ensure it gets where it needs to go. In the absence of leadership from the world’s largest humanitarian body, smaller organizations have taken up the mantle.

Only for Supporters
To read the rest of this article and access other paid content, you must be a supporter
Read full Article
post photo preview
Why Are Thailand and Cambodia Suddenly at War?
What Americans Should Know


By Chuck Holton | July 25, 2025


What's Happening

Fighting has broken out along the border between Thailand and Cambodia, two countries in Southeast Asia. At least 14 people are dead, over 100,000 civilians have been displaced, and both sides are using heavy weapons — including jets, rockets, and artillery.

Only for Supporters
To read the rest of this article and access other paid content, you must be a supporter
Read full Article
See More
Available on mobile and TV devices
google store google store app store app store
google store google store app tv store app tv store amazon store amazon store roku store roku store
Powered by Locals