One of the landmark achievements of President Jimmy Carter’s presidency was the successful negotiation of the Torrijos-Carter Treaties. These pivotal agreements, ratified by the U.S. Senate in 1978, paved the way for the nation of Panama to regain control of the strategically vital Panama Canal, a waterway that significantly impacts global trade routes and geopolitics. But to understand the significance of these treaties, we need to explore the history of the canal and the complex relationship between Panama and the United States – starting with Panama Where it is located and why this location was so crucial.
The genesis of the Panama Canal dates back to the early 20th century when the United States sought to construct a canal connecting the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans. Initially, the Hay-Herrán Treaty was negotiated with Colombia in 1903, granting the U.S. rights to the land necessary for the canal. However, the Colombian Senate’s refusal to ratify this treaty coincided with Panama’s burgeoning movement for independence from Colombia. Recognizing the strategic advantage of Panama where it sat on the isthmus, President Theodore Roosevelt threw his support behind Panamanian independence, driven by the ambition to secure the canal route. This support proved decisive, and on November 18, 1903, the Hay-Bunau-Varilla Treaty was signed. This treaty, negotiated under questionable circumstances by Phillippe-Jean Bunau-Varilla, a Panamanian representative lacking formal authorization and long removed from Panamanian life, granted the United States permanent rights to a Panama Canal Zone. This zone, stretching across the isthmus of Panama where the canal would be built, effectively divided the country. The Panama Canal was completed and opened in 1914, but its very inception was marked by controversy and resentment amongst Panamanians who questioned the legitimacy of the treaty and the extent of U.S. control over their territory.
As the 20th century unfolded, simmering tensions between the United States and Panama regarding U.S. sovereignty over the Canal Zone grew increasingly pronounced. In 1964, these tensions erupted in violent riots. Sparked by a dispute over the right to fly the Panamanian flag in the Canal Zone, these riots between U.S. residents and Panamanians led to a temporary severing of diplomatic ties between the two nations. While relations were quickly re-established, the incident underscored the urgent need for a renegotiated agreement that addressed Panamanian sovereignty and the future of the Canal. By 1967, tentative agreements on three treaties were reached, but political instability in Panama, specifically the ousting of President Marco Robles and the subsequent coup led by Colonel Omar Torrijos in 1968, stalled progress.
Despite the political upheaval, Omar Torrijos shared his predecessors’ desire to forge a new agreement with the United States. American officials also recognized the necessity of a treaty. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, in a 1975 meeting with President Ford, articulated the geopolitical imperative: failure to negotiate a Canal treaty would result in severe international condemnation and widespread unrest across Latin America. In 1973, the Nixon administration appointed Ellsworth Bunker, a seasoned diplomat, to spearhead the U.S. negotiating team. Bunker’s strategy shifted the focus from perpetual U.S. control of the Panama Canal Zone to ensuring perpetual U.S. use of the Panama Canal, a subtle but crucial distinction. Between 1973 and 1976, Bunker’s team and the Panamanian government laid the groundwork for the treaties that would eventually become the Torrijos-Carter Treaties.
The 1976 U.S. presidential election injected uncertainty into the treaty negotiations. While President Ford was supportive, his primary challenger, Ronald Reagan, vehemently opposed any treaty relinquishing U.S. control. Initially, Democratic nominee Jimmy Carter also voiced skepticism, stating in an October debate that he would not surrender “practical control of the Panama Canal Zone any time in the foreseeable future.”
However, following his electoral victory, President-elect Carter’s stance began to evolve. Influenced by key advisors like Sol Linowitz and Secretary of State-designate Cyrus Vance, Carter came to recognize the strategic and diplomatic advantages of a new treaty. Upon assuming office, Carter prioritized concluding negotiations with Panama, appointing Linowitz as co-negotiator alongside Bunker.
Despite the shared commitment of Carter and Torrijos, significant hurdles remained, particularly in securing ratification by the U.S. Senate. Treaties required a two-thirds majority for ratification, and strong opposition existed, led by figures like Senator Strom Thurmond. Thurmond and other conservatives viewed relinquishing control of the Canal Zone as a strategic blunder and harbored distrust of Torrijos, whom they suspected of communist sympathies. To overcome this resistance, the Carter administration engaged in extensive consultations with Congress, effectively conducting a second layer of treaty negotiations to address Senate concerns.
The Carter administration launched a public outreach campaign to garner support for the treaties, holding numerous forums to explain the rationale behind the agreement. Torrijos himself hosted U.S. Senators in Panama, emphasizing his commitment to positive relations with the U.S. and dispelling accusations of communist leanings. Even conservative icon John Wayne lent his support to the negotiations, leveraging his friendship with Torrijos. Strategically, the negotiators decided to present two treaties to the Senate. The first, the Neutrality Treaty, guaranteed the permanent neutrality of the Panama Canal and crucially, the right of the United States to use military force to defend the canal against any threat to its neutrality, ensuring continued U.S. access. The second, the Panama Canal Treaty, stipulated the dissolution of the Panama Canal Zone on October 1, 1979, and the complete transfer of the canal to Panamanian control on December 31, 1999. These two treaties were signed on September 7, 1977, marking a significant step forward.
The Senate ratification process was arduous and protracted, lasting over six months. Opponents attempted to introduce amendments designed to undermine support for the treaties. Ultimately, the Carter administration prevailed, albeit narrowly. The Neutrality Treaty was ratified on March 16, 1978, by a vote of 68 to 32, followed by the Panama Canal Treaty on April 18, with an identical vote. The Carter administration subsequently worked with Congress on implementation legislation, signed into law on September 27, 1979, to fully realize the Torrijos-Carter Treaties.
The Torrijos-Carter Treaties were hailed as a diplomatic triumph, bolstering the U.S.’s image and countering accusations of imperialism, particularly from Soviet-aligned nations. While the treaties ushered in an era of cooperation, relations between the U.S. and Panama faced renewed strain after Torrijos’s death in 1981, culminating in the U.S. invasion of Panama in 1989. However, by 1999, relations had improved, and the Panama Canal was peacefully transferred to Panamanian administration. Panama has capably managed the canal ever since, demonstrating their commitment to its efficient operation and global significance, proving that Panama where the canal is located is now also Panama where it is successfully run.
