On Friday last week, Panama's Supreme Court delivered a ruling that declared the port operating rights held by a subsidiary of the Hong Kong-based CK Hutchison Holdings at both ends of the Panama Canal were "unconstitutional". The decision, which nullified the legitimate business operations of a major Chinese company, has left China with no choice but to fight back to defend Chinese enterprises' legal rights and interests.

The ruling has effectively terminated the port concessions of CK Hutchison, which have been in operation since 1997 under legally binding contracts. Over the years, the company has reportedly invested $1.8 billion in Panama, and created thousands of jobs in the country. Such contributions should have warranted respect and protection. In response, the company said on Wednesday its subsidiary had started arbitration proceedings against Panama.

The "judgment" cannot be divorced from political factors. If there were constitutional issues, why didn't the relevant Panamanian authorities raise them earlier? Instead, the case emerged after the US administration sharpened its focus on the Western Hemisphere and revived the Monroe Doctrine.

Therefore, the Office of the Comptroller General in Panama has initiated this case at a politically charged moment. Furthermore, it is clear that the statements from the Panamanian government are a result of US interference. Multiple US officials feel no qualms about calling China's "loss" in Panama a "success" of the United States.

The expulsion of the Chinese enterprise is unmistakably political manipulation by the US. Panama's judicial authorities have been reduced to a mere puppet. Far from whitewashing the act, this clumsy charade has backfired spectacularly, laying bare the incident's inherently political nature for the world to see and exposing the government and court's complicity with Washington. This act tarnishes Panama's reputation as a global logistics hub bridging two oceans. When a nation brazenly bends the rule of law and market norms to serve a political agenda, it sends a warning to all investors and enterprises — Panama is a place where political calculations trump fair and stable business practices.

Until Panama changes its mind, it doesn't make sense for Chinese companies to continue to invest there in case they may lose their investment overnight.

The Chinese company's arbitration bid may not overturn the court's ruling. Even so, Panama is obligated to mitigate the Chinese enterprises' losses and to provide compensation or even damages.

The Hong Kong Special Administrative Region government has issued a statement expressing strong dissatisfaction and firm opposition to Panama's ruling. And the Chinese Foreign Ministry has emphasized that the country will take all necessary measures to firmly safeguard the legitimate and lawful rights and interests of Chinese enterprises, warning Panama of the potential economic repercussions, including the risk of losing access to the vast Chinese market.

China's unyielding stance underscores the paramount importance Beijing places on safeguarding its enterprises' overseas investments, and it issues a clear admonition to Panama: uphold market laws and the spirit of contract, as is its fundamental duty. Panama is not, in truth, caught in a bind between China and the US — instead it is making a choice between bowing to US pressure and upholding the basic tenets of justice and the rule of law.

While Panama can be criticized for acting this way, its move demonstrates how a sovereign state may bend to the will of a hegemonic US. Recent US moves, from its military actions in Venezuela to its rhetoric over Greenland and its latest stress test of Australia over Darwin Port, reflect the insatiability of Washington's hegemonic and imperialistic greed.

The ruinous fallout of Washington's unbridled lust for global hegemony will prove unbearable for the world. This brazen power grab lays bare the urgent need for the international community to unite in defense of fair, transparent and equitable global norms.