A History of the Panama Canal – and Why Trump Can’t Take It Back Alone

PANAMA CITY: Teddy Roosevelt once declared that the Panama Canal was “one of the feats which the people of this republic will remember with the greatest pride.” More than a century later, Donald Trump threatens to take back the waterway for the benefit of this same republic.
The president-elect denounces the increase in fees imposed by Panama for the use of the waterway connecting the Atlantic and Pacific oceans. He said that if things don’t change after he takes office next month, “we will demand that the Panama Canal be returned to the United States of America, in its entirety, quickly and without question.”
Trump has long threatened his allies with punitive measures in the hope of extracting concessions. But experts from both countries are clear: Short of going to war with Panama, Trump will not be able to reassert control of a canal that the United States agreed to cede in the 1970s.
Here’s a look at how we got here:
What is the channel?
It is an artificial waterway that uses a series of locks and reservoirs over more than 82 kilometers to pass through central Panama and connect the Atlantic and the Pacific. This saves ships from having to travel an additional approximately 7,000 miles (more than 11,000 kilometers) to round Cape Horn, at the southern tip of South America.
The U.S. International Trade Administration says the canal saves U.S. business interests “significant time and fuel costs” and allows for faster delivery of goods, which is “particularly important for factor-sensitive goods.” time, perishable goods and industries with just-in-time supply chains”. “
Who built it?
An effort to establish a canal through Panama led by Ferdinand de Lesseps, who built Egypt’s Suez Canal, began in 1880 but made little progress for nine years before going bankrupt.
Malaria, yellow fever and other tropical diseases devastated a workforce already struggling with particularly dangerous terrain and harsh working conditions in the jungle, ultimately costing more than 20,000 lives, according to some estimates.
Panama was then a province of Colombia, which refused to ratify a subsequent 1901 treaty authorizing American interests to build the canal. Roosevelt responded by sending American warships to Panama’s Atlantic and Pacific coasts. The United States also drafted a constitution that would be ready after Panama’s independence, giving American forces “the right to intervene in any part of Panama, to restore public peace and constitutional order.”
Partly because Colombian troops were unable to cross harsh jungles, Panama declared bloodless independence within hours in November 1903. It soon signed a treaty authorizing a U.S.-led team to begin construction.
Some 5,600 workers later died during the US-led construction project, a study found.
Why does the United States no longer control the canal?
The waterway was opened in 1914, but almost immediately some Panamanians began to question the validity of American control, leading to what became known in the country as the “generational struggle” for control.
The United States gave up its right to intervene in Panama in the 1930s. In the 1970s, as administrative costs rose sharply, Washington spent years negotiating with Panama to cede control of the waterway .
The Carter administration worked with the government of Omar Torrijos. Both sides ultimately decided that their best chance for ratification was to submit two treaties to the U.S. Senate, the “Treaty of Permanent Neutrality” and the “Panama Canal Treaty.”
The first, which continues in perpetuity, gives the United States the right to act to ensure the canal remains open and secure. The second stated that the United States would cede the canal to Panama on December 31, 1999 and then ended.
Both agreements were signed in 1977 and ratified the following year. The accords continued even after 1989, when President George HW Bush invaded Panama to depose the Panamanian leader. Manuel Noriega.
In the late 1970s, as the handover treaties were being discussed and ratified, polls revealed that about half of Americans opposed the decision to cede control of the canal to Panama. However, by the time ownership actually changed in 1999, public opinion had shifted, with about half of Americans in favor.
What has happened since then?
Administration of the canal was more effective under Panama than under the American era, with traffic increasing 17 percent between fiscal years 1999 and 2004. Panamanian voters approved a 2006 referendum authorizing a major expansion of the canal to accommodate largest modern cargo ships. The expansion lasted until 2016 and cost more than $5.2 billion.
Panamanian President José Raul Mulino said in a video on Sunday that “every square meter of the canal belongs to Panama and will continue to do so.” He added that while his country’s people are divided on some key issues, “when it comes to our canal and our sovereignty, we will all unite under our Panamanian flag.”
Shipping prices have risen due to droughts last year that affected the canal’s locks, forcing Panama to significantly reduce shipping traffic using the canal and raise user fees. Although the rains have mostly returned, Panama says future fee increases may be necessary as it undertakes improvements to meet modern shipping needs.
Mulino said fees for using the canal “are not set on a whim.”
Jorge Luis Quijanowho served as waterway administrator from 2014 to 2019, said all canal users are subject to the same fees, although they vary depending on the size of the vessel and other factors.
“I can accept that canal customers may complain about any price increases,” Quijano said. “But that doesn’t give them reason to consider taking it back.”
Why did Trump raise this issue?
The president-elect says the United States is being “ripped off” and “I’m not going to tolerate it.”
“It was given to Panama and the Panamanian people, but it has provisions: You have to treat us fairly. And they haven’t treated us fairly,” Trump said of the 1977 treaty he called ” stupidly” given. the channel away.
The neutrality treaty gives the United States the right to act if the operation of the canal is threatened due to military conflict – but not to reassert its control.
“There is no clause of any kind in the neutrality agreement that authorizes the resumption of the canal,” Quijano said. “Legally, there is no way, under normal circumstances, to reclaim territory that was previously used.”
Trump, meanwhile, has not said how he might carry out his threat.
“There is very little room for maneuver, in the absence of a second U.S. invasion of Panama, to regain control of the Panama Canal in practical terms,” said Benjamin Gedan, director of the Latin America program at Woodrow Wilson. International Center for Scholars in Washington.
Gedan said Trump’s position is particularly disconcerting given that Mulino is a pro-business conservative who has “made many other overtures to show that he would prefer a special relationship with the United States.” He also noted that Panama has grown closer to China in recent years, meaning the United States has strategic reasons to maintain friendly relations with the Central American country.
Panama is also a partner with the United States in combating illegal immigration from South America – perhaps Trump’s biggest policy priority.
“If you’re going to think about fighting with Panama over one issue,” Gedan said, “you couldn’t come up with a worse one than the canal.”