The response of the People’s Republic of China to the tariff war has been a long-term strategic one. President Xi Jinping has reinforced his rhetoric in favor of manufacturing self-sufficiency within the framework of the “Made in China 2025” program, which prioritizes the dominance of strategic technological sectors through subsidies and endogenous development. The emphasis on “self-reliance and mastery of key core technologies” reflects not only an economic necessity but also a political stance against the United States. This strategic shift toward internal strengthening carries logistical implications: on one hand, it reduces dependence on external inputs, and on the other, it promotes the reconfiguration of export routes more aligned with Beijing’s interests.
Since April 2025, the United States has intensified its tariff policy, applying levies ranging from 10% to 50% on key imports such as automobiles, steel, aluminum, semiconductors, and pharmaceutical goods. This strategy aims not only to balance the trade deficit but also to pressure trade partners into renegotiating bilateral agreements.
Moreover, the temporary agreement between Beijing and Washington that reduced tariffs from 145% to 30% for a 90-day period has triggered a “bottleneck effect” at Chinese ports, as exporters rush to ship goods before the tariffs are reinstated. This has led to port congestion and an explosive demand for maritime logistics capacity.
THE PANAMA CANAL AND THE BIOCEANIC ALTERNATIVE
In light of the geostrategic importance of the Panama Canal—where Chinese companies have relinquished their terminals under U.S. pressure—China has activated a “Plan B” by leading an alliance with Brazil and Peru. This involves the Bioceanic Railway Corridor, which would connect the Atlantic Ocean to the Pacific. This logistics axis, linking Brazil’s industrial centers with the port of Chancay (Peru)—under the control of COSCO—would allow China to reduce its dependence on a “choke point” while improving interconnection with its trade partners.
This is a maneuver of significant geopolitical scope. Diverting bulk (iron ore, soybeans, grains, etc.) and containerized traffic toward the Pacific not only provides a faster and more cost-effective alternative for South American exporters, it also strengthens China’s position in global supply chains.
Xi Jinping has openly expressed support for Panama amid external pressures and the sale of Hutchison Ports’ (HPH) terminals to a consortium formed by BlackRock—a global investment management giant—and Terminal Investment Limited (TiL), a subsidiary of Mediterranean Shipping Company (MSC). The battle for supremacy in maritime infrastructure is undeniable. The struggle for control over the Panama Canal and the strategic interests of companies such as COSCO and COFCO in South American terminals are part of a broader strategy of progressive expansion of state-run logistics chains. China remains persistent and consistent—far from retreating from the region, it continues to intensify its diplomatic, economic, and port presence in Latin America.
IMPLICATIONS FOR MARITIME TRAFFIC AND PORTS
The evolution of global economic and trade policies is redefining logistics maps. The tensions between the two major powers—the United States and China—within the broader trend of “decoupling” are giving rise to new routes and port hubs. Latin America is a key target in this equation, as is Asia, which is driving the creation or strengthening of port hubs.
Congestion at Chinese ports, driven by tariff fluctuations and erratic trade policies, highlights the fragility of logistics systems when exposed to political shocks.
The rise of strategic infrastructure, the construction of railway corridors like the Bioceanic Corridor, and the expansion of agro-industrial terminals in Brazil all reinforce the trend toward vertical integration and state control of logistics nodes. This context is pushing Port Authorities to anticipate geopolitical volatility through resilient strategies, operational flexibility, and ongoing traffic diversification.
We have moved from the era of hyper-globalization to one of fragmented geoeconomics. In this new context, maritime logistics is no longer a mere auxiliary service—it has become a central variable in the exercise of political and commercial power. Understanding these shifts is essential to anticipating the challenges that ports, shipping lines, and logistics operators face in the new multipolar order of global maritime trade.
