In the wake of President Trump’s repeated calls to retake the Panama Canal, the United States and Panama have taken an important step in strengthening their long-standing security relationship. On February 18, 2025, officials from both nations held the first official U.S.-Panama Special Operations Forces (SOF) talks. These discussions were held alongside joint combined training exercises, reinforcing decades of cooperation and a shared commitment to regional stability.

According to Navy Rear Adm. Mark A. Schafer, commander of U.S. Special Operations Command South (Socsouth), the partnership reflects both nations’ dedication to addressing regional security challenges—from transnational crime and drug trafficking to disaster response.

“The work you do is not just critical to Panama but serves as a cornerstone for regional security,” Schafer told Panamanian officials during the talks.

The recent U.S.-Panama Special Operations Forces talks and joint training might seem connected to President Trump’s renewed rhetoric about retaking the Panama Canal, but the reality is more nuanced.

Here’s what we can tell so far:

1. Officially, this is about strengthening regional security.

The SOF talks and training exercises fall under the long-running U.S. Special Operations Command South (Socsouth) mission to partner with Latin American countries on counter-narcotics, disaster response, and transnational threat mitigation. The public language focuses heavily on mutual cooperation, building partner capacity, and ensuring stability—particularly around key strategic areas like the Darién Gap and the Panama Canal.

2. The U.S. has had a continuous SOF presence in Panama for years.

This isn’t new. The U.S. never fully left Panama in terms of security cooperation. While the U.S. military officially pulled out in 1999 after handing over the Canal, special operations units have maintained training and advisory roles. This recent meeting simply formalizes and deepens that partnership.

3. Trump's statements may be political, not policy—at least for now.

President Trump’s calls to “retake the Panama Canal” have made headlines, but there’s no formal Department of Defense directive suggesting any move toward reclaiming control. His comments likely reflect concern about Chinese influence in Panama, especially given that Chinese firms manage several key port operations near the canal.

4. This agreement could be part of a broader strategic posture in Latin America.

Even if it isn’t explicitly about retaking the canal, the timing and optics matter. Formalizing SOF cooperation and boosting joint capabilities near the canal sends a clear signal: the U.S. is paying attention, investing in alliances, and ensuring the canal stays in friendly hands. It may be a subtle counter to foreign influence—especially from China—rather than a direct preparation for a military takeover.

If you’ve been watching global events lately, you know the temperature on the geopolitical thermometer is rising fast. And this week, Russia just threw gasoline on the fire.

On Thursday, Russian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova issued a blunt warning to the United States and its allies: Hands off Iran. Her words weren’t vague diplomatic gestures—they were a clear and forceful declaration that any military strike against Iran’s nuclear infrastructure would be “illegal and unacceptable” and could bring “far-reaching and irreversible consequences.”

Let that sink in.

Zakharova’s statement comes on the heels of growing tension between the U.S. and Iran. President Donald Trump, reinstating his maximum pressure campaign, has threatened military action if Tehran doesn’t come to the negotiating table. And earlier this month, he sent a letter directly to Iran’s Supreme Leader, urging diplomacy—but backing it up with a warning that a failure to deal could trigger military strikes.

Iran’s response? Predictable. Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei made it clear that any aggression would be met with a “severe blow.” Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi called the letter “more of a threat,” though he admitted it did open a narrow door to negotiation.

Meanwhile, in a show of growing military and strategic alignment, Russia sent a warship into Iranian waters for joint naval drills with Iran and China—an image that should make the hair stand up on the back of every serious analyst’s neck.

This isn’t just a game of chicken. This is a chess match with nuclear consequences.

Russia and Iran recently signed a comprehensive strategic partnership. That means any conflict involving Iran now carries the risk of dragging Russia directly into the fight. And when you throw China into that mix—another nation that’s been flexing its muscles in the Pacific—you start to see the outlines of something that looks a lot like... well, a world war.

You think I’m being dramatic?

Look around. You’ve got a U.S. president issuing ultimatums, a sanctioned and desperate Iran pushing forward with its nuclear program, and a nuclear-armed Russia vowing to back Tehran. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent made it plain this week: Washington’s goal is to crush Iran’s ability to fund terror, build weapons, and abuse human rights. That’s not a policy difference—that’s a collision course.

And while the U.S. has emphasized diplomacy backed by sanctions and strength, Moscow is drawing its own red lines.

So here’s the question I want to ask you—and I am running a poll on my YouTube channel about it: Do you think World War III has already begun?
If you answered yes, tell me—when do you think it started?

Because the more we see military alliances forming, red lines being drawn, and nuclear threats thrown around like poker chips, the more it’s starting to look like we’re already living through the early chapters of the next great global conflict.

The Pacific region, particularly Saipan and its neighboring islands, has long played a strategic role in global military affairs. While Saipan itself does not host a large military presence, nearby islands such as Tinian and Guam are critical outposts for U.S. defense. Tinian, just a short flight away from Saipan, is home to substantial U.S. military operations. This proximity underscores the strategic importance of the Northern Mariana Islands in maintaining regional security and U.S. military readiness.

Beyond the Pacific, broader geopolitical shifts continue to shape international relations. One of the most significant concerns is the evolving role of NATO, particularly in relation to Turkey. Turkey's status as a NATO ally has become increasingly complex under President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, whose government has leaned toward Islamist influences, shifting away from the secular policies that defined Turkey's early NATO membership. This shift has created friction within the alliance, raising concerns about Turkey's loyalty and strategic alignment.

A major point of contention is NATO's Article 5, which stipulates that an attack on one member is an attack on all. This obligation becomes particularly problematic if Turkey were to engage in a conflict where its actions might be viewed as aggressive rather than purely defensive. For example, if Turkey found itself at odds with Israel, the alliance would face a dilemma over whether to uphold collective defense obligations.

Meanwhile, tensions in the Middle East continue to escalate, with targeted military strikes and strategic maneuvers shaping the regional landscape. Recently, an Israeli operation in Lebanon eliminated Hezbollah operative Hassan Bair, who was linked to Iran’s Quds Force and was reportedly planning an attack on Israeli civilians, including an attempted airline bombing in Cyprus. This preemptive strike likely averted a significant tragedy, highlighting the constant security threats faced by Israel and its intelligence capabilities.

At the same time, the conflict involving the Houthis in Yemen has intensified. The Houthis have repeatedly claimed to have downed U.S. drones and attacked American naval vessels, though many of these claims lack credible evidence. The U.S. military continues to engage in defensive measures, intercepting missiles and maintaining a strategic presence in the region to counter threats originating from Iranian-backed groups.

Iran remains a central figure in Middle Eastern instability, and there is growing speculation about potential military action against the Iranian regime. While diplomatic efforts persist, Iran’s continued involvement in proxy conflicts and its support for militant groups have fueled discussions about a possible escalation. Any military action against Iran would have significant global implications, affecting everything from energy markets to regional alliances.

In Israel, security concerns have led to increased border fortifications, including a newly planned $1.4 billion wall along the Jordanian border. While Israel has previously fortified its borders with Gaza, the new construction aims to prevent arms smuggling and unauthorized crossings. Similarly, Egypt's military buildup in the Sinai Peninsula has raised alarms, as Cairo appears to be exceeding the limits outlined in its peace agreement with Israel. Expanding runways and port facilities in the Sinai suggests long-term military ambitions, prompting Israel to file formal complaints.

These developments highlight the shifting nature of global security challenges, from military build-ups in the Pacific to political maneuvering in NATO and heightened conflicts in the Middle East. As nations navigate these turbulent waters, strategic alliances and military preparedness will continue to play a crucial role in maintaining global stability.

Watch The Full Video Here