U.S. Finds it
Difficult to Hand Over the Panama Canal
By JONATHAN
POWER
December 29, 1999
MADRID- Americans are not good at giving away their
territorial possessions, few though they've had. The
renunciation of their ownership of the Panama Canal Zone has
been handled with as much grace as a sack of potatoes.
Refusing to attend if the ceremony were held at noon on
December 31st as the treaty mandates, the celebratory party
was advanced a couple of weeks to mid-December. Even then
only ex-president Jimmy Carter, who in 1977 negotiated the
treaty ending U.S. jurisdiction, made the relatively short
journey.
New situation, but the same reflexes. In the words of
Ronald Reagan, who helped nearly cripple the young Carter
presidency with a vitriolic anti-Canal Treaty campaign, "We
built it, we paid for it, it's ours".
But, despite all the second thoughts in Washington and
the whispering campaign about a future Chinese grab for the
canal via the Hong Kong company that has won the lease to
run the ports at either end of the great international
waterway, the canal will be formally in Panama's hands by
the afternoon of the last day of the millennium.
The substance will have finally changed; alas, the style
has not. In 1903 all the White House had to do, without
consulting any Panamanians, was to contact the editor of the
New York World and ask him to publish a communique. It read:
"Information has reached this city that the state of Panama
stands ready to secede from Colombia and enter into a canal
treaty with the U.S.." Six months later a rebellion was duly
organized to firm up the secession and the first canal
treaty was signed- without bothering to ask for the
Panamanian signature, although it granted the U.S. in
perpetuity all rights and authority in the canal zone "which
it would possess if it were sovereign to the territory."
It was an unsustainable interposition in a now largely
de-colonized world. And it was to Carter's credit that he
realized that the canal hung like an albatross around
America's neck - even though his timing was naively wrong,
given the then priority of wooing the Senate to ratify the
upcoming arms control treaties with the Soviet Union.
America's ownership of the canal zone not only was poisoning
the U.S. relationship with the proud and eminently
successful state of Panama- it had achieved by this time a
level of all round economic and social well-being second to
none in Latin America- it complicated America's dealings
with all of Latin America. Rightly, these proud and
headstrong countries who had fought so hard in the previous
century to win their independence from Spain and Portugal,
had a profound hostility to gringo colonialism.
The bitterness ran very deep. A taste of it can be found
in Graham Greene's chronicle, "Getting to know the General".
In it Greene recounts one of his many intimate conversations
with General Omar Torrijos, the military president who
negotiated the Panama Canal Treaty face to face with Carter.
"The Canal is easy to sabotage", said Torrijos, "Blow a hole
in the Gatun dam and the canal will drain down to the
Atlantic. It would take only a few days to mend the dam, but
it would take three years of rain to fill the canal. During
that time it would be guerrilla war waged from the jungle".
(The forest and mountains that link Panama and Colombia are
among the most impenetrable in the world; and all attempts
to link the two countries with a road have failed.)
Greene became the friend and confidante of Torrijos
during the difficult days of the treaty negotiations. He
observed that Torrijos "would not be entirely unhappy if the
U.S. Senate refused to ratify the Treaty (as it nearly did).
He would be left with the simple solution of violence, which
had often been in his mind, with desire and apprehension
balanced as in a sexual encounter."
Torrijos died in a mysterious plane crash and was
succeeded by Manuel Noriega, his friend and fellow
party-giver, who also enjoyed the juxtaposition of sex and
violence, authenticating his masculinity with the urge to
tell America to go and be damned. But, unlike Torrijos, he
was corrupted by the drug trade and Washington was able to
build a case against him that at least convinced itself, if
less others, that the U.S. was within its rights, as the
protector of free passage in the canal, to depose this
malevolent and unstable character. In due course he was
sentenced in a Miami court and remains incarcerated.
That the U.S. got away with this without provoking a
serious reaction in Panama was because of Carter's earlier
success (although the then president George Bush would never
have admitted to it). It had defused Panamanian hostility
and indeed measurably improved Washington's fraught
relationship with the whole of Latin America.
It is more the pity that present day Washington seems
intent on throwing away Carter's legacy. The U.S. should be
stepping out of Panama with style and its head high. George
Bush, Gerald Ford and Bill Clinton himself should all be
there on the 31st to salute the transition. It will be an
historic opportunity missed. And the rest of the world will
see it as one more of many recent instances of the Clinton
Administration demonstrating the arrogance of power.
Copyright © 1999 By JONATHAN POWER
I can be reached by phone +44 385 351172 and e-mail:
JonatPower@aol.com
|