OCR Text |
Show The Paper That Dares To Take Page 6 The Utah Independent December 22, 1977 Continued from page Don,t Let Jimmy Carter Give Away the Panama Canal 1 is that there is little Communist influence in Panama today...' Documented proof is offered in this pamphlet to refute these two totally misleading statements by Carter's Secretary of State. RIGHT TO PROTECT CANAL IN DOUBT Carter and Administration spokesmen are telling the American people that under the Panama Canal Treaty the U.S. can and unilaterally legally reintervene to prothe Canal and its neutrality. tect However, Panama's treaty negotiator, Romulo Escobar Bethancourt, contradicted Carter by emphatically stating in a speech in the Panamanian National Assembly on August 19: "We are not giving the United States the right of intervention." And Senator Harry F. Byrd, Jr., in a Senate speech, pointed out: "A scrutiny of the actual texts of the treaties shows that the U.S. right to defend the neutrality of the Canal is an implied right which is not clearly stated in the text." PANAMA CANAL BELONGS TO U.S. IN PERPETUITY" The contention by Carter Administration spokesmen that the Canal and the Canal Zone is really Panamanian property and that the Republic of Panama never relinquished its sovereign rights has no basis in truth. On November 18, 1903, the U.S. signed a treaty (called the Treaty) with the new Republic of Panama. This treaty states "the Republic of Panama grants to the United States in perpetuity the use, occupation and control" of the Canal Zone for the purpose of building and maintaining a canal; and that "the Republic of Panama grants to the United States all the rights, power and authority within the zone. ..which the United States would possess and exercise if it were the sovereign... to the entire exclusion of the exercise by the Republic of Panama of any such sovereign rights, power or Hay-Bunau-Va- rilla authority." For this conveyance of title and relinquishment of sovereignty in perpetuity, the U.S. paid Panama $10,000,000 in gold, and agreed to make an annual payment of $250,000 for the life of the treaty. This sum has since been negotiated upward and is now in the neighborhood of $2,000,000 annually. STRATEGIC VALUE OF PANAMA CANAL The Carter Administration claims that because huge aircraft carriers and supersize oil tankers cannot use the Canal, that it is strategically obsolescent. Not true. Only 13 Stand A aircraft carriers and 26 super- U.S. Ambassador, put it this way: "Torrijos himself is a Red stooge, to MILITARY EXPERTS WARN OF DANGERS say the least, if not an outright Communist. His minister of foreign affairs and OF CANAL GIVEAWAY minister of labor, in tum are outright The Joint Chiefs of Staff have joined Communists, directed in the customary of Panama the with Carter in support way from Moscow. There are at least Canal Treaty. However, these are active-dut- y 2,800 known Communists in Panama, follow bound to officers; they are many controlling government offices.... the policy laid down by the President, Fidel Castro's guerrilla fleet is moving commander-in-chieOn the f. other armed fighters into Panama from Cuba." their ofhand, the careers of senior retired PANAMA? ficers can't be wrecked by a President A SOVIET TAKEOVER OF An editorial in the CHATTANOOGA in the Pentagon. who wants yes-mPRESS of September 8 raised For this reason, the Senate, when de- NEWS-FRE- E bating the Treaty, should pay particular these alarming questions: heed to the statement of opposition issued "What if the Panama Canal were surby four former Chiefs of Naval Operations, rendered to Torrijos, and then he invited Admirals Robert B. Carney, Arleigh Burke, in the Cuban Reds, or the Soviets and H. and Moorer. Thomas Anderson George their missiles? Or, what if Torrijos were In their statement, a letter to the overthrown (as he overthrew his prePresident forwarded by Senators John Mcdecessor government in unstable PanHelms F. Jesse Clellan, Harry Byrd, Jr., ama) and a regime unfriendly to the and Strom Thurmond, the four former United States were installed, threatening Chiefs of Naval Operations wrote: our right of Canal passage? " age, takes a month." en "...(U.S.) sovereignty and jurisdiction over the Canal Zone and Canal offer the opportunity to use the waterway or to deny its use to others in wartime.... "Under the control of a potential adversary, the Panama Canal would become an immediate crucial problem and prove a serious weakness in the over-a- ll U.S. defense capability, with enormous potential consequences for evil." STIPULATIONS OF THE PANAMA CANAL TREATY If ratified by the U.S. Senate, theU.S. would immediately give Panama sovereignty and title over most of the U.S. Canal Zone. After 22 years, the U.S. is prohibited from any action whatsoever to defend the Canal, and may not, according to the Treaty, have any "military forces, defense sites and military installations" at the Canal. Not only does President Carter propose to give the Panama Canal to Panama but he also would have us pay the Panamanians for the privilege of taking it! In addition to increasing payments to Panama to as much as $70 million a year from the of the the Canal U.S. negotioperation ators of the treaty have pledged Panama up to $200 million in Export-Impo- rt Bank 7 in million U.S. Agency credits; up to for International Development housing guarantees and a $20 million Overseas Private Investment Corporation loan guarantee. And finally, as Edith Kermit Roosevelt pointed out in her column of September 25. "According to the Panama Canal Treaty, even in time of war there must be no discrimination against the vessels of any other nation. Thus, not only would the warships of an enemy of the United States be permitted to transit the tanal but a U.S. warship would have to wait its tum for passage while the ships of other nations, combatant as well as commercial, took their tum at entering the Canal." tankers fit this description. On the other hand, a total of 98 per cent of U.S. naval and 90 including submarines ships per cent of U.S. commercial shipping still can use the Canal. The Canal also is essential to the movement of Alaskan oil to the U.S. East Coast which needs it most. At present, standard- size oil tankers comprise a great portion BACKGROUND ON PANAMA'S of Canal traffic. Shipping Alaskan oil around GOVERNMENT Cape Horn at the tip of South America is President Carter is careful to keep from not economically feasible. the American people the background of the Addressing himself to the "big ships government of Panama to which he proposes can't use" claim, M. Stanton Evans in an to surrender our Canal. article in the October 1, 1977, issue of Here's what Congressman George HUMAN EVENTS stated: Washington-base- d Hansen has to say in this regard: "The ruler of Panama, General Omar "It is true that some of our larger the aircraft carTorrijos, is a Marxist. His government military vessels is comprised of Marxists. He is allied to riers cannot transit the Canal. We 13 of them. All of the remaining have Fidel Castro. He is in sympathy with 451 active ships in our Navy, however, the Soviet Union's goal of forced PRO-RE- D Com-munizat- can use the Canal, and have done so regularly. "If these ships were denied access to the Canal in time of war, the effect would be disastrous. To get from the Atlantic to the Pacific, these vessels would have to travel 8,000 additional miles around the continent of Latin a process that, on the aver America ion of our entire Western Hemisphere. Torrijos is an unstable, unpre- dictable tyrant who has outlawed all political parties in Panama except the Communist Party." And columnist Henry J. Taylor, a former Testifying before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on October 10, retired former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Thomas Moorer, warned: "Do not be surprised if this Treaty is ratified in its present form, to see a 8ndor Cuban presence quickly established in the country of Panama." Which would mean, of course, a spring- Soviet board for further Communist penetration of Latin America, and a definite threat to the U.S. mainland itself. statement In the previously-referred-to the President by four former Chiefs of Naval Operations, the following dire prediction is made: to "Loss of the Panama Canal, which would be a serious setback in war, would contribute to the encirclement of the U.S. by hostile naval forces, and threaten our ability to survive." SOVIETS MOVING IN ON CANAL Congressman Eldon Rudd, a freshman lawmaker who has seen much ar Latin American service during a which career in the FBI, made a speech gave facts that have been studiously avoided press and the by the Leftwing-controllCarter Administration. According to Rudd, on July 19, 1977, the Soviet Union and Panama signed an agreement which gave the USSR the following: (1) the right to build, open and operate a bank in Panama; (2) The right to construct a hydroelectric plant in Panama; (3) The right to use France Field in the U.S. Canal Zone which is an old U.S. Air Force base that the Panamanian government is currently leasing from the U.S. Canal Zone. Here's what THE NEWS of Lynchburg, Va., had to say on this crucial point: On August 4, 20-ye- ed "If we turn the Canal over to Panama, we'll find the Soviets firmly estab- lished in that country, waiting to take advantage of our giveaway. And, since Soviet 'businessmen' and bankers and construction workers are Soviet agents at the discretion of the Kremlin, they would be in position to take control of or sabotage the Canal at a moment's notice. "Under these conditions, giving the Canal to Panama is the same as turning it over to Moscow." Here's how an c issue of the MAN( 7 LEADER put it: "The Jimmy ( his freedom from interests now erne man for the Rod ests which have s new treaty. column by Roi revealed that the F is nearly bankrupt from $167 millioi A seized control, ne; approximately $1.5 It is estimated loaned Panama $2. loans from their fo In this connect in his column of "Unless Torri on the Canal j year we are prom takes it he is in And so are his ere banks." Thus it is seen t Panama Canal is, bail out the big inte Congressman Hanst "I can't say it strop out of American ri big money interests WHAT YOU CAN DO Before the Pa effective, it will a vote Article IV, Sectioi stitution states tha the power to dis needful rules and two-thir- ds territory of other the United States. House of Represei pass, by a simply legislation to pert U.S. -- owned Canal If you oppose Panama Canal, ant here are a few sug; Buy and d i s t pamphlet. Send co man and two Ser editor of your loc or send copies to bors, urging that or send copies of Senators and Congr If Congress is protest, it is dou! Congress wouli Panama Canal gu Carter has agreed Order I X of i I IXDKPI.NI)! Littleton, 1 Coli-rad'- A; . Si Prices: 8 - $1.00 50 - 20 -- $2.00 100 -- Postal This pamphlet is puhli AMERICAN, a natio founded in 1955. A s will be sent to you on Copyright 1977 by Til Phoebe Courtney, Man THE BIG BANKS PRESSURE FOR THE TREATY WHY the major pressure for ratification of the Panama Canal Treaty comes from a group of big banks which have overextended themselves in loans to the Panamanian government. And President Carter, who accepted the financial support from leading members of David Rockefeller's Trilaterial Commission during the Presidential cam- paign, has succumbed to the pressure. STOP AB I'M TOO YOU! |