Basic HTML Version
to sweep Mexico. The millions of ille–
gal aliens now living sub rosa in the
U.S. would be joined by additional
millions (perhaps tens of millions)
seeking political asylum!
Canal Zone Turnover
Viewing these disturbing events in
the strife-torn Caribbean basin, there
could not possibly be a more disad–
vantageous time for the United
States to relinquish exclusive control
over the Panama Canal , the lifeline
of U.S. oceanic commerce.
Yet "T-Day"- October 1, 1979
-is now upon us. Tbat's tbe day that
the U .S.-controlled Cana l Zone
ceases to exist and the 547-square–
mile territory is offically
turned over
(that 's what the "T" stands for) to
the Republic of Panama.
The Canal itself, running down the
middle of the former U.S. Zone, is
scheduled to be jointly operated and
defended by both countries until the
end of this century, after which time
Panama will have total control. But
the key date is October l. At this
time, Panama assumes sovereign
rights to the territory encompassing
the world's most strategic man-made
waterway. The United States, as of
this date, becomes, in effect, a mere
concessionaire, with limi ted rights
and privileges. (For the full story on
the importance of the Panama Canal
to the economic security of the
United States and the entire Western
world, see the article "Canal Zone
Handover: America's Strategic Sur–
render?" in tbe June 1977
Plain
Truth.
Or request a free reprint of
this article.)
For all practica) purposes, Panama
has been sovereign over the Zone
ever since April 1 of this year, when
the Panama Canal treaties, signed in
1977 by President Carter and ap–
proved last year by the U.S. Senate
by a two-vote margin, became the
law of the 1and. However, there is an
official six-month waiting period.
Hence, T- Day is October
l.
During this six-month period, the
House of Representatives, charged
by the Constitution with the respon–
sibility of disposing of U .S. property,
was to enact "enabling legislation" to
implement the
treati~s
and provide
funds and technical means for setting
42
up new post-treaty procedures–
such as transferring U.S. bases and
equipment to Panama and estab–
lishing a joint U.S.-Panaman ian
commission to operate the canal be–
tween October 1, 1979 and the end of
the century (when U.S. responsibi1ity
totally ceases).
The H ouse, however, is still, as of
this writing, balking at the key ele–
ments of the enabling legislation.
For one·thing, the House members
have been finding out that the cost of
disposing the Canal Zone property
and the expected future cost to the
U.S. of the new arrangement are
turning out to be much greater than
expected. {How ironic. The U.S. is
now worried about whether or not it
can afford to give away the canal!)
The latest estímate is that U.S.
taxpayers will shell out at least $350
million by the time the canal is trans–
ferred to Panama. But since there are
so many uncertainties involved in the
complicated process, and because Pa–
namanian demands beyond the scope
of the treaty are escalating almost
daily, the actual cost could be much
greater. One long-time opponent of
the new canal treaties estimates that
by the end of the 20-year life of the
pacts, the U.S. Treasury will be
out to the tune of four billion dol–
lars.
Angry representatives are charg–
ing that the State Department delib–
erately misled senators about the cost
of honoring the treaties. As proof of
this, they cite Secretary of State Cy–
rus Vance's 1978 testimony before
the Senate Foreign Relations Com–
mittee, in which Vanee said fiatly:
"The treaties require no new appro–
priations, nor do they add to the bur–
den of the American taxpayer."
With " T -Day" approaching
around the corner (it may have
passed by the time you read this arti–
cle), now is certainly. not the time for
the U .S. Congress to "count the
cost." That should have been done
during tbe Senate debate on the new
treaties last year.
What happens if "T -Day" comes
and legislation to implement the
treaties has not been finalized? No
one seems to know at the moment.
But one thing is for sure:
If
the date
arrives and the U.S. does not relin-
quish control of tbe Zone, there will
be big trouble! " T-Day" wi11 be
"Trouble Day."
Panamanian strong man Ornar
Torrijos has warned about just that.
Asked what alternatives Panama has
if the United States does not imple–
ment the treaty, Torrijos said that, in
his view, such failure would erase the
1903 treaty now in effect. " If they
come in violating a new treaty, tben
there is no treaty," Torrijos added.
"Therefore we could, without violat–
ing any norms of international law,
push them [the Americans] from the
canal."
Even if all goes well, and October
1 passes peacefully, it will certainly
be a milestone marking America's
precipitous decline, with thousands
of jubilant Panamanians streaming
over the border onto the former U.S.
property.
Treaty Pltfalls
The new treaties with Panama are
only the-beginning of t rouble for the
U.S. on the isthmus. The pacts are
full of ambiguities and are bound to
cause friction in the future. " Dual
sovereignties," especially between
such unequal parties, rarely work.
Henceforth, trivial disagreements
will be blown up into major clashes.
The safety of skilled American
workers-no longer protected by the
Zone buffer-will be constant ly
jeopardized. Should a mass exodus of
these workers occur,
it
would mean a
shutdown of the canal , crippling
American trade, especially the trans–
port of oil and the massive exports of
U.S. farm goods.
"The plain fact is that conflict
with the United States-even violent
confiict- is built into the very struc–
ture of Panamanian history," says
Latín American expert Marc Fa1-
saff. "Anything less than the com–
plete surrender of the canal by the
United States will eventually be un–
satisfactory."
The United States, for example,
claims the new treaty arrangement
gives it the right to defend the canal
unilaterally if necessary. Panama
claims any such action would violate
Panamanian sovereignty.
The seeds of violent disruption
have thus been sown.
The
PLAIN TAUTH October / November 1979