THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Saturday, June 10, 1995 TAG: 9506090010
SECTION: FRONT PAGE: A14 EDITION: FINAL
TYPE: Another View
SOURCE: By G. RUSSELL EVANS
LENGTH: Medium: 68 lines
The surrender of the Panama Canal is scheduled for 1999 under the Panama Canal Treaties. But what about the superb and strategic U.S. bases that are also scheduled for surrender in 1999? Does Panama want all these bases? Are they being dumped on an unready Panama? Is Panama having second thoughts?
It was my privilege to return to Panama during the period May 1-7 as representative of the citizens group known as the National Security Center - my fifth visit in 10 years to find out once again the sentiment among Panamanian and American leaders for continuing a few bases. In-depth interviews were conducted with political, military, business, media, canal, embassy and labor leaders - 31 in all.
The consensus for holding onto a few U.S. bases was even stronger this year than in 1994, when I accompanied Congressman Philip M. Crane, R-Ill., and Howard Phillips of The Conservative Caucus and 21 other citizens on another fact-finding trip. Of the 31 leaders who took a position in 1995, 83 percent favored bases, up from 79 percent in 1994.
Moreover, public-opinion polls by La Prensa, Panama's leading newspaper, showed 71 percent in favor of U.S. bases compared with 67 percent in the United States in a similar poll taken by the Marketing Research Institute of Pensacola, Fla.
So the Panamanian leaders and people and the American public definitely favor U.S. bases after 1999. What about U.S. political leaders? They're dawdling!
Congressman Crane has a concurrent resolution (H CON RES 4) pending in the House Subcommittee on Western Hemisphere for continuing base rights in Panama. A hearing was held on March 9, and most witnesses supported H CON RES 4. Congressman Crane, in his testimony, advocated a sort of landlord (Panama)/tenant (U.S.) arrangement for an agreement with Panama on the selected bases.
Sen. Jesse Helms, R-N.C., has a similar resolution pending in the Senate. Both resolutions are ``sense of the Congress'' measures, asking President Clinton to initiate negotiations with Panama. Time is of the essence - only 4 1/2 years until the year 2000.
The fly in the ointment is that neither nation is willing to ask first. Panamanian Foreign Minister Gabriel Lewis Galindo told me on May 2 in his office in Panama, ``We will not go to you and ask, `Do you want bases?''' adding, ``The ball is in your court.''
Our conclusions are as follows: (1) Public-opinion polls in both countries strongly favor U.S. bases after 1999, as do most of Panama's leaders. The hold-up is in the U.S. Congress. (2) The Crane resolution and the Helms resolution should be passed by Congress and sent to President Clinton. (3) The Panamanian National Assembly will probably not pass a resolution for negotiations with the United States. (4) The Panamanians are facing a crisis in the dumping of U.S. bases before they are ready. The time element is critical with only 4 1/2 years remaining. (5) Nearly all Panamanian leaders interviewed favored Howard Air Force Base, Rodman Naval Station, Fort Sherman and Galeta Island as the bases for the United States to retain. (6) The majority also favored the Crane resolution for a landlord/tenant arrangement for bases.
Readers who agree may wish to ask their elected representatives to support the Helms and Crane resolutions and call on President Clinton to initiate negotiations with the Republic of Panama. MEMO: Captain Evans, U.S. Coast Guard (ret.), lives in Norfolk.
by CNB