MHO Home   Forum Home   Help   Register   Login
 
 
Welcome to MilitaryHistoryOnline.com.
You are not signed in.
The current time is: 10/19/2017 11:19:07 PM
 General History    
AuthorMessage
Michigan Dave
Muskegon, Michigan, MI, USA
top 5
E-9 Cmd Sgt Major


Posts: 2770

Panama Canal Prized possesion!? contorversial transfer of ownership?
Posted on: 10/2/2017 12:02:25 PM
Your opinion on the controversial and not always peaceful transfer, & it's aftermath?

[Read More]

[Read More]

MD

BTW Check out part 2 on the video documentary going over the enlargement of the canal system.
---------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."

OpanaPointer
St. Louis, MO, USA
top 20
E-7 Sgt First Class
Posts: 465

Re: Panama Canal Prized possesion!? contorversial transfer of ownership?
Posted on: 10/2/2017 12:10:45 PM
We sent a battleship to persuade the Colombians to "be reasonable".

George
Centre Hastings, ON, Canada
top 5
E-9 Cmd Sgt Major
Posts: 5298

Re: Panama Canal Prized possesion!? contorversial transfer of ownership?
Posted on: 10/2/2017 12:35:54 PM
Not America's best moment. It was imperialism at its worst but no different than some of the actions of other nations.

The US and the British and the French had long wanted a link to the Pacific through Panama which was under the rule of Columbia. The French gave it a go in the late 1880's but packed it in when it proved to be an engineering nightmare and workers were dying in huge numbers.

The Columbians didn't like the proposed deal offered by the US which had taken over the building of the canal. The Columbian senate wouldn't ratify.

No problem. The US supported a revolution in the Panamanian sector and then recognized Panama as a country.

Then a treaty was struck with some contentious wording that granted the US the right to build and control the canal.

The Columbians were angry but couldn't do much about it because as OP alluded, the USN showed up with gunboats to make sure that the Colombians didn't do anything stupid like trying to retake Panama.

Gunboat diplomacy.

Ironically, the Panamanians didn't like the deal any more than the Colombians.


Wasn't it Jimmy Carter who finally signed a treaty in the 70's, with Panama, giving them management rights of the canal so long as they continued to treat it as an international waterway?

So what was the status of Panama vis a vis the US after the revolution in 1903? Were they like Puerto Rico?

Cheers,

George

OpanaPointer
St. Louis, MO, USA
top 20
E-7 Sgt First Class
Posts: 465

Re: Panama Canal Prized possesion!? contorversial transfer of ownership?
Posted on: 10/2/2017 1:20:25 PM
Panama was "independent", but the Canal Zone was run by the US. Our military "protected it".

George
Centre Hastings, ON, Canada
top 5
E-9 Cmd Sgt Major
Posts: 5298

Re: Panama Canal Prized possesion!? contorversial transfer of ownership?
Posted on: 10/2/2017 3:27:49 PM

Quote:
Panama was "independent", but the Canal Zone was run by the US. Our military "protected it".
--OpanaPointer


OP, are you being sarcastic?

Cheers,

George

OpanaPointer
St. Louis, MO, USA
top 20
E-7 Sgt First Class
Posts: 465

Re: Panama Canal Prized possesion!? contorversial transfer of ownership?
Posted on: 10/2/2017 4:56:31 PM
We had a military presence there right up to turn-over. Technically the Panamanians operated the Canal but we ran the Zone.

john hayward
Allenstown, NH, USA
top 40
E-4 Corporal
Posts: 131

Re: Panama Canal Prized possesion!? contorversial transfer of ownership?
Posted on: 10/2/2017 8:25:20 PM
In 1927 we "paid" the Colombians for the land and apologized

jthlmnn
Milwaukee, WI, USA
top 40
E-4 Corporal


Posts: 164

Re: Panama Canal Prized possesion!? contorversial transfer of ownership?
Posted on: 10/7/2017 5:12:10 PM
From britannica.com [Read More]:


Quote:
The Canal Zone came into being on May 4, 1904 (“Acquisition Day”), under the terms of the Hay–Bunau-Varilla Treaty of 1904 by which Panama granted to the United States, in return for annual payments, the sole right to operate and control the canal and about 5 miles (8 km) of land on each side. The canal was constructed between 1904 and 1914. As reorganized in 1951, the administration of the canal and adjoining land was entrusted to two closely related U.S. agencies, the Panama Canal Company (responsible for operating the canal itself) and the Canal Zone government (responsible for civil rule in the zone). The governor of the Canal Zone, appointed by the president of the United States and supervised by the secretary of the army, was ex officio president and director of the Panama Canal Company.


Text of the Hay–Bunau-Varilla Treaty of 1904: [Read More]

Yours,
JohnT

Michigan Dave
Muskegon, Michigan, MI, USA
top 5
E-9 Cmd Sgt Major


Posts: 2770

Re: Panama Canal Prized possesion!? contorversial transfer of ownership?
Posted on: 10/17/2017 11:49:36 AM
Well Panama certainly owns the Canal today!

Here are answers to other Canal questions?

[Read More]

MD
---------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."

George
Centre Hastings, ON, Canada
top 5
E-9 Cmd Sgt Major
Posts: 5298

Re: Panama Canal Prized possesion!? contorversial transfer of ownership?
Posted on: 10/17/2017 12:02:24 PM

Quote:
Well Panama certainly owns the Canal today!

Here are answers to other Canal questions?

[Read More]

MD
--Michigan Dave



With conditions.

Michigan Dave
Muskegon, Michigan, MI, USA
top 5
E-9 Cmd Sgt Major


Posts: 2770

Re: Panama Canal Prized possesion!? contorversial transfer of ownership?
Posted on: 10/19/2017 9:39:07 AM

Quote:
We sent a battleship to persuade the Colombians to "be reasonable".
--OpanaPointer



Like TR said, "walk quietly but carry a big stick"!

"The Big Stick Policy!"

[Read More]
---------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."

John Wallace
Mostly Saudi Arabia, UK
New User
E-2 Private
Posts: 5

Re: Panama Canal Prized possesion!? contorversial transfer of ownership?
Posted on: 10/19/2017 2:53:56 PM
There is an interesting comparison to be made. Britain bought Egypt's shares in the Suez canal for £4,000,000 - due to their economic plight, but of their own choice, Egypt formally agreed a neutral canal zone under British control, principally because the King had invited them in to save him from a military coup in 1881. The arrangement was renewed until 1956 in a treaty of 1936, and Egypt got a pretty good deal out of the arrangement in 1914 and 1939.

Its extension agreed by Nasser in 1954. In 1956, because of growing relations between Egypt and Russia, Britain and America backed out of financing the Aswan High Dam, and Nasser nationalised the canal, ostensibly to pay for it. Britain and France seized it back, and the reaction of the Eisenhower government was to threaten to sell all the British sterling bonds it held, producing economic disaster.

brian grafton
Victoria, BC, Canada
top 10
E-9 Sergeant Major
Moderator


Posts: 1309

Re: Panama Canal Prized possesion!? contorversial transfer of ownership?
Posted on: 10/19/2017 3:55:18 PM
John, welcome back to posting on MHO. It seems years since I saw your name on post, unless I've got the wrong body!

Cheers
Brian G
---------------
"We have met the enemy, and he is us." Walt Kelly.

"The Best Things in Life Aren't Things" Bumper sticker.

 General History    
 Forum Ads from Google