Artikels

Panama onafhanklik van Columbia - geskiedenis

Panama onafhanklik van Columbia - geskiedenis


We are searching data for your request:

Forums and discussions:
Manuals and reference books:
Data from registers:
Wait the end of the search in all databases.
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.

'N Revolusie onder leiding van Philippe Jean Bunau-Varilla, 'n organiseerder van die Panama Canal Company, verklaar Panama onafhanklik van Columbia. Amerikaanse vlootmagte het die Colombiane verhinder om die opstand te onderdruk. Op 17 November is die Hay-Bunau-Varilla-verdrag tussen Panama en die VSA onderteken, wat die Amerikaners eksklusiewe regte oor die Canal Zone gee.

Panama verklaar onafhanklikheid van Colombia

Die hele Colombiaanse mag in Panama en kolon - ongeveer 460 man - het die landhuis in die posboot Orinoco verlaat, en die departement van Panama is dus in die hande van die revolusioniste. Loomis, assistent -sekretaris van die Verenigde State van Washington, het gister 'n konferensie met president Roosevelt gehad. Op die vraag, nadat hy die president verlaat het, of die uitreiking van 'n amptelike verklaring wat beloof is, die erkenning van die onafhanklikheid van die nuwe regering van Panama beteken, antwoord hy (Reuter se korrespondent) bevestigend. Hy het voorgestel dat die Amerikaanse regering waarskynlik die de facto -regering sou erken waarmee die buitelandse konsuls huidige sake kon verrig, en voeg by dat, indien Colombia hom teruggetrek het, daar andersins geen regering sou wees om dit te doen nie. Hy het ook die mening uitgespreek dat daar binnekort 'n permanente regering in die Isthmus gevestig sal word.

In 'n latere boodskap sê Reuter se korrespondent dat die Amerikaanse regering die de facto -regering van Panama erken het en dat hy die heer Beaupre, die Amerikaanse minister in Bogota, opdrag gegee het om die Colombiaanse regering en Ehrwen, die konsul in Panama in kennis te stel. , om die nuwe Panama -regering daarvan in kennis te stel. 'President Roosevelt', gaan die telegram voort, 'in die lig van die vriendskapsbande wat al lank tussen die onderskeie nasies bestaan ​​het, beveel die regerings van Colombia en Panama ernstig om tot 'n vreedsame oplossing van die vrae tussen hulle te kom. Die president is van mening dat die Verenigde State nie net gebonde is aan verdrag nie, maar aan die belange van die beskawing om te sien dat die vreedsame verkeer van die wêreld oor die land nie meer versteur moet word deur 'n voortdurende opeenvolging van onnodige en verkwistende burgeroorloë nie. " Daar word verder verduidelik dat die 'erkenning' wat tans gemaak word 'van 'n sakekarakter is', en dat volledige politieke erkenning mettertyd sal volg wanneer die nuwe regering 'n meer gereelde vorm aanneem. Vervolgens sal die Verenigde State onderhandel oor die bou van die kanaal.

Ons korrespondent in New York, wat gisteraand telegrafeer, het gesê:- Die gevoel onder konserwatiewe mense is dat Washington onwelvoeglik haastig was om die sogenaamde Republiek Panama te erken. Engeland het 'n baie sterker argument gehad om die Suidelike Konfederasie te erken. Die mees betreurenswaardige is die vulgêre lug, die huursoldaat se eiebelang wat die hele transaksie beïnvloed. Selfs die Jameson Raid kan ten minste 'n menslike doel voorgee, terwyl dit onmoontlik is om die feit dat die huidige onderneming bloot kommersieel is, te verberg.

Redaksioneel
Die nuus wat uit die land van Panama gekom het sedert die opstand in die stad aangekondig is, dui daarop dat die beweging geïnspireer is deur Amerikaanse agente. Daar word aangeneem dat die regering in Washington homself onbetrokke gehou het en dat sy verantwoordelikheid nominaal onbetrokke was, maar dit het daadwerklik tussen die opstandelinge en die Colombiaanse regering ingemeng, en die opstandelinge moes sekerlik geweet het dat dit sou gebeur ... Waaroor die feite werklik kom, is dat die Amerikaanse regering, wat die kanaalgebied begeer en dit nie deur 'n verdrag kan beheer nie, dit met geweld van Colombia afgeskeur het.


'N Kort geskiedenis van Panama

Die eerste mense het ongeveer 11 000 vC in Panama gewoon. Teen 2500 vC het hulle geleer om pottebakkery te maak, en later het mense uit die streek handel gedryf met ander so ver noord as Mexiko en so ver suid as Peru.

Die eerste Europeër wat in Panama geland het, was 'n Spanjaard met die naam Rodrigo Galvan de Bastidas in 1501. Die eerste Spaanse nedersetting in Panama is in 1510 gemaak. Toe op 25 September 1513 het Vasco Nunez de Balboa die eerste Europeër geword om die Stille Oseaan te sien (wat hy het die Suidsee gebel en wat hy vir Spanje geëis het). Toe in 1519 stig Pedro Arias de Avila Panama City.

Intussen is die inheemse bevolking gedomineer deur Europese siektes, waarteen hulle geen weerstand gehad het nie. Die oorlewendes was slawe. Die Spaanse het 'n soort feodale stelsel ingestel waarin die inheemse bevolking gedwing is om op boedels te werk.

Toe Pizarro die Inka's in 1533 verower, het Panama 'n oorgangspunt geword vir goud op pad van Peru na Spanje. Die edelmetaal is per muil van die Stille Oseaan -kus na die Atlantiese kus deur die muil oor land geneem.

Die groot rykdom in die omgewing trek egter die aandag van die Engelse. In 1572 val Francis Drake op Nombre de Dios toe. In 1671 verbrand 'n Wallieser met die naam Henry Morgan Panama City. Dit is herbou op 'n nuwe plek, enkele kilometers verder in 1673. Uiteindelik is die skatroete in 1746 verander. Van toe af is dit per see om die Kaapse Hoorn geneem.

Panama het op 28 November 1821 onafhanklik geword van Spanje. Aanvanklik was Panama deel van 'n superstaat genaamd Gran Colombia, wat bestaan ​​het uit Panama, Colombia, Ecuador, Peru, Bolivia en Venezuela. Gran Colombia breek egter gou uit, maar Panama bly verbonde aan Colombia.

In 1846 onderhandel die VSA 'n verdrag om spoorweë oor Panama te bou. 'N Nuwe spoorlyn oor die landgrond is voltooi in 1855. Die Franse het die eerste poging aangewend om 'n kanaal oor Panama te grawe. Werk aan die skema het in 1881 begin, maar die onderneming het in 1889 bankrot geraak.

In 1899-1902 is 'n burgeroorlog in Colombia gevoer (wat Panama ingesluit het). Dit is die oorlog van die duisend dae genoem.

Op 3 November 1903 word Panama onafhanklik van Colombia, aangemoedig deur die VSA. President Theodore Roosevelt was gretig om 'n kanaal oor Panama te grawe. Die VSA het 'n verdrag met Panama onderteken wat hulle soewereine regte oor die kanaalgebied gee. Daar is in 1904 aan die kanaal begin werk. 'N Groot aantal trekarbeiders uit baie verskillende lande is na Panama gebring om aan die kanaal te werk, en baie van hulle is dood aan siektes soos geelkoors. Nietemin, op 7 Januarie 1914 vaar die eerste skip deur die Panamakanaal. Die Panamakanaal is op 12 Julie 1920 amptelik deur president Woodrow Wilson geopen.

Daarna was Panama 'n oligargie, regeer deur 'n aantal ryk families.

'N Nuwe verdrag tussen die VSA en Panama is in 1936 onderteken, maar die wrok oor Amerikaanse regte oor die kanaalgebied het toegeneem. Uiteindelik het studente op 9 Januarie 1964 in Panama oproerig geraak. Twintig mense is dood in die onluste. (9 Januarie is nou martelaarsdag in Panama.)

In 1968 het 'n staatsgreep die verkose president, Arnulfo Arias, omvergewerp. Daarna word generaal Omar Torrijos die leier van Panama. In 1977 het hy daarin geslaag om die Amerikaanse president Carter te oorreed om 'n verdrag te onderteken wat Panama op 31 Desember 1999 volledige beheer oor die kanaal sou gee.

Torrijos is dood in 'n vliegongeluk in 1981. In 1983 word hy vervang deur Manuel Noriega. Noriega het 'n onderdrukkende regime ingestel. Die betrekkinge met die VSA het egter versleg. In 1987 begin die VSA met ekonomiese sanksies. In 1988 word Noriega aangekla op aanklag van dwelm in die VSA. In 1989 het presidentsverkiesings in Panama plaasgevind en dit is gewen deur Guillermo Endara. Noriega het egter net die uitslag van die verkiesing nietig verklaar.

Uiteindelik, op 20 Desember 1989, het die VSA Panama binnegeval. Hulle het Panama -stad gebombardeer. Op 25 Desember 1989 het Noriega egter toevlug geneem by die Vatikaanse ambassade. Hy is in Januarie 1990 gevange geneem.

Intussen is Guillermo Endara, die wenner van die 1989 -verkiesing, tot president van Panama aangewys. In 1994 is hy vervang deur Ernesto Perez Balladares. Toe in 1999 word Mireya Moscoso die eerste vroulike president van Panama.

Ook in 1999 is die Panamakanaal aan Panama oorhandig. In 2004 word Martin Torrijos president. In 2009 word Ricardo Martinelli president van Panama. Tussen 2007 en 2016 het 'n nuwe projek die Panamakanaal vergroot.

Vandag is Panama 'n vinnig ontwikkelende land en het 'n blink toekoms. In 2018 was die bevolking van Panama 4,1 miljoen. Die bevolking van Panama City is 880,000.

Panama Stad


Geskiedenis van Panama (1821-1903)

Panama sou as 'n royalistiese vesting en voorpos bly tot 1821 (die jaar van Panama se rewolusie teen Spanje). Panama -stad het onmiddellik planne begin om onafhanklikheid te verklaar, maar die stad Los Santos het die stap voorafgegaan deur op 10 November 1821 vryheid uit Spanje te verklaar. . Daar is aansienlike besprekings gevoer oor of Panama deel van Colombia moet bly (wat dan bestaan ​​uit die huidige land en Venezuela) of om met Peru te verenig. Die biskop van Panama, 'n inheemse Peruaanse wat die kommersiële bande wat met sy land ontwikkel kan word, besef, voer aan vir laasgenoemde oplossing, maar word afgestem. 'N Derde moontlike optrede, 'n vakbond met Mexiko wat deur afgevaardigdes van die land voorgestel is, is verwerp.

Panama het dus deel geword van Colombia, toe beheer onder die Grondwet van Cúcuta van 1821, en is aangewys as 'n departement met twee provinsies, Panamá en Veraguas. Met die toevoeging van Ecuador tot die bevryde gebied, het die hele land bekend geword as Gran Colombia. Panama het 'n mag van 700 man gestuur om by Simón Bolívar in Peru aan te sluit, waar die Peruaanse onafhanklikheidsoorlog voortgeduur het.

Die beëindiging van die vyandelikhede teen die royaliste in 1824 kon nie tot rus bring in Gran Colombia nie. Die grondwet wat Bolívar vir Bolivia opgestel het, is deur hom voorgestel om in Gran Colombia aangeneem te word. Die land was hoofsaaklik verdeeld oor die voorstel dat 'n president lewenslank sou dien. Die president is nie verantwoordelik teenoor die wetgewer nie en het die mag om sy vise -president te kies. Ander bepalings, oor die algemeen sentralisties in hul neigings, was vir sommige afstootlik, terwyl 'n paar 'n monargie wou hê. Panama het gewapende geweld vrygespring oor die grondwetlike vraag, maar het by ander streke aangesluit om Bolívar te versoek om diktatoriale magte te aanvaar totdat 'n konvensie kon vergader. Panama kondig sy unie met Gran Colombia aan as 'n "Hanzestaat", dit wil sê as 'n outonome gebied met spesiale handelsvoorregte totdat die byeenkoms gehou is.

In 1826 vereer Bolívar Panama toe hy dit kies as die plek vir 'n kongres van die onlangs bevryde Spaanse kolonies. Baie leiers van die revolusies in Latyns-Amerika het die oprigting van 'n enkele regering vir die voormalige Spaanse kolonies beskou as die natuurlike opvolging om die peninsulares. Beide José de San Martín en Francisco de Miranda het voorgestel om 'n enkele groot monargie te stig wat beheer word deur 'n keiser wat uit die Inkas afstam. Bolívar was egter die een wat die ernstigste poging aangewend het om die Spaanse Amerikaanse republieke te verenig.

Alhoewel die bond of konfederasie wat Bolívar beoog, die seëninge van vryheid en geregtigheid sou bevorder, was 'n primêre doel om die onafhanklikheid van die voormalige kolonies te verseker teen hernieude aanvalle deur Spanje en sy bondgenote. In hierdie poging soek Bolívar die beskerming van Brittanje. Hy was huiwerig om verteenwoordigers van die Verenigde State, selfs as waarnemers, na die kongres van gevolmagtigdes uit te nooi sodat hul samewerking die posisie van die liga met die Britte benadeel. Verder het Bolívar gemeen dat die neutraliteit van die Verenigde State in die oorlog tussen Spanje en sy voormalige kolonies sy verteenwoordiging onvanpas sou maak. Daarbenewens sou slawerny in die Verenigde State 'n struikelblok in die bespreking van die afskaffing van die Afrikaanse slawehandel wees. Bolívar het nietemin toegegee toe die regerings van Colombia, Mexiko en Sentraal -Amerika die Verenigde State genooi het om waarnemers te stuur.

Ondanks die groot implikasies van die Monroe -doktrine, was president John Quincy Adams - by die besluit om afgevaardigdes na die Panama -konferensie te stuur - nie die Verenigde State verplig om sy suidelike bure te verdedig nie. Adams het sy afgevaardigdes opdrag gegee om nie deel te neem aan beraadslagings oor streeksveiligheid nie en om die besprekings van maritieme neutraliteit en handel te beklemtoon. Tog het baie lede van die Amerikaanse kongres deelname onder enige omstandighede gekant. Teen die tyd dat deelname goedgekeur is, het die afvaardiging nie tyd gehad om die konferensie te bereik nie. Die Britte en Nederlanders het nie -amptelike verteenwoordigers gestuur.

Die kongres van Panama, wat in Junie byeengeroep en in Julie 1826 verdaag is, is deur vier Amerikaanse state bygewoon - Mexiko, Sentraal -Amerika, Colombia en Peru. Die Verdrag van Unie, Liga en Ewige Konfederasie wat op daardie kongres opgestel is, sou alle partye tot wedersydse verdediging en die vreedsame beslegting van geskille gebind het. Omdat sommige ook gevrees het dat monargiese elemente wat simpatiek is vir Spanje en sy bondgenote beheer oor een van die nuwe republieke kan herwin, bevat die verdrag 'n bepaling dat indien 'n lidstaat sy regeringsvorm aansienlik sou verander, dit van die konfederasie uitgesluit sou word en word slegs met die eenparige toestemming van alle ander lede toegelaat.

Die verdrag is slegs deur Colombia bekragtig en het nooit in werking getree nie. Bolívar, wat verskeie pogings aangewend het om minder federasies te stig, het kort voor sy dood in 1830 verklaar dat "Amerika onregeerbaar is, diegene wat die rewolusie gedien het, die see geploeg het." Ten spyte van sy ontnugtering, het hy die beskerming van die Verenigde State egter nie as 'n plaasvervanger vir kollektiewe veiligheidsreëlings onder die Spaanse sprekende state beskou nie. Trouens, hy word toegeskryf aan die feit dat hy gesê het: "Dit lyk asof die Verenigde State bestem is dat die Verenigde State Amerika met ellende in die naam van Liberty teister."

Drie aborsiewe pogings om die landmus van Colombia te skei, het tussen 1830 en 1840 plaasgevind. sy sterfbed. Die tweede poging tot skeiding was die plan van 'n ongewilde diktator, wat gou afgesit en tereggestel is. Die derde afstigting, 'n reaksie op burgeroorlog in Colombia, is deur 'n gewilde vergadering verklaar, maar 'n jaar later het herintegrasie plaasgevind.

Selfs voordat die Verenigde State Kalifornië ná die Mexiko -Amerikaanse oorlog (1846–48) verkry het, het baie op pad na Kalifornië die landing van die landery gebruik, bo die lang en gevaarlike wa -roete oor die uitgestrekte vlaktes en ruwe bergreekse. Die ontdekking van goud in 1848 het die verkeer aansienlik verhoog. In 1847 het 'n groep finansiers in New York die Panama Railroad Company gereël. Hierdie onderneming het 'n eksklusiewe konsessie verkry uit Colombia wat die bou van 'n kruising moontlik maak, wat per pad, spoor, rivier of 'n kombinasie kan wees. Na opnames is 'n spoorlyn gekies en 'n nuwe kontrak is in 1850 verkry. Die spoorlyn volg oor die algemeen die lyn van die huidige kanaal. Die eerste deurtrein van die Atlantiese Oseaan na die Stille Oseaan het op 28 Januarie 1855 op die voltooide spoor gery.

Die goudkoortsverkeer, nog voor die voltooiing van die spoorlyn, het Panama se welvaart herstel. Tussen 1848 en 1869 het ongeveer 375 000 mense die landtang van die Atlantiese Oseaan na die Stille Oseaan oorgesteek, en 225 000 in die teenoorgestelde rigting. Pryse vir voedsel en dienste is aansienlik verhoog, wat enorme winste uit etes en verblyf oplewer.

Die spoorlyn het ook 'n nuwe stad en hawe by die Atlantiese eindpunt van die lyn geskep. Die stad wat onmiddellik ontstaan ​​het om spoorwegkantore, pakhuise, dokke en winkels te akkommodeer en spoorwegwerkers sowel as passasiers te huisves, het gou geword en bly die tweede grootste in die land. Amerikaanse burgers het dit Aspinwall genoem, na een van die stigters van die Panama Railroad Company, maar die Panamese het dit Colón gedoop ter ere van Columbus. Beide die name is jare lank gebruik, maar omdat die Panamese daarop aangedring het dat daar nie so 'n plek soos Aspinwall bestaan ​​nie en geweier het om pos te stuur, het die naam Colón die oorhand gekry.

Die goudstormloop en die spoorlyn het ook die Verenigde State se "Wilde Weste" na die landtong gebring. Die veertig-en-negentig was gewoonlik 'n onstuimige lot, gewoonlik verveeld terwyl hulle gewag het op 'n skip na Kalifornië, gereeld dronk en dikwels gewapen. Baie het ook vooroordeel getoon oor minagting vir ander rasse en kulture. Die sogenaamde Watermelon Riot van 1856, waarin minstens sestien mense dood is, was die ernstigste botsing van rasse en kulture van die tydperk.

In 1869 is die eerste transkontinentale spoorlyn in die Verenigde State voltooi. Hierdie ontwikkeling het passasiers- en vragverkeer oor die landmus verminder en die hoeveelheid goud en silwer wat oos gestuur is, verminder. Gedurende die hoogtepunt van die goudstormloop, van 1855 tot 1858, was slegs 'n tiende van die gewone kommersiële vrag bedoel vir of het sy oorsprong in Kalifornië. Die balans het betrekking op die handel van die Noord -Amerikaners met Europa en Asië. Die spoorwegonderneming het, vanweë sy buitengewone hoë opbrengs op 'n kapitalisasie wat nooit US $ 7 miljoen oorskry het nie, 'n totaal van bykans $ 38 miljoen aan dividende betaal tussen 1853 en 1905. Panama het US $ 25,000 uit Colombia se lewensrente ontvang en voordeel getrek uit kortstondige handel en 'n mate van invloei. van kapitaal.

Gedurende die negentiende eeu het regerings en private beleggers in die Verenigde State, Brittanje en Frankryk af en toe belangstelling getoon in die bou van 'n kanaal oor die Westelike Halfrond. Verskeie webwerwe is oorweeg, maar van die begin af het dié in Nicaragua en Panama die ernstigste aandag gekry. President Andrew Jackson het Charles A. Biddle in die 1830's as sy gesant gestuur om albei roetes te ondersoek, maar die projek is gestaak toe Biddle sy regeringsmissie laat vaar het en in plaas daarvan met Colombiaanse kapitaliste onderhandel het vir 'n privaat toegewing.

Tog het Colombia steeds belangstelling getoon om met die Verenigde State te onderhandel oor die bou van 'n kanaal. 'N Verdrag is in 1846 tussen die twee lande onderteken. Die verdrag verwyder die bestaande beperkende tariewe en gee die Verenigde State en sy burgers die reg op vrye vervoer van persone en goedere oor enige pad of kanaal wat in die landmark aangebou kan word. Daarbenewens het die Verenigde State die neutraliteit van die landengte en die soewereiniteit van Colombia daaroor gewaarborg, met die doel om ononderbroke deurgang vir die duur van die verdrag te verseker, wat twintig jaar of so lank sou wees as wat die partye geen kennis gegee het om te hersien nie Dit. Dit is die Mallarino -Bidlack -verdrag van 1846 genoem en is eintlik bekragtig en het in 1848 in werking getree.

Omdat die kanaalbelange van Brittanje en die Verenigde State steeds bots, veral in Nicaragua, probeer Brittanje en die Verenigde State spanning verlig deur die Clayton -Bulwer -verdrag van 1850 aan te gaan. 'n Nicaraguaanse kanaal bou sonder die deelname van die ander. Hierdie algemene beginsel is uitgebrei tot enige kanaal of spoorweg in Sentraal -Amerika, tot die landbou van Tehuantepec in Mexiko en Panama. Aangesien geen van die regering toe 'n kanaal gewillig was of kon begin nie, was die verdrag vir die tyd 'n instrument van neutraliteit.

Colombia se poging om kanaalbelangstelling te lok, het uiteindelik die Franse aandag op Panama gevestig. Na verskeie opnames is 'n toegewing van eksklusiewe regte verkry uit Colombia, en in 1879 word 'n onderneming gestig om 'n seevlakkanaal oor die algemeen langs die spoorweg te bou. Ferdinand de Lesseps, van die roem van die Suez -kanaal, was die hoof van die onderneming. Die voorwaardes van die konsessie vereis voltooiing in twaalf jaar, met die moontlikheid van 'n verlenging van ses jaar na goeddunke van Colombia. Die huurkontrak was negentig jaar oud en kon oorgedra word, maar nie aan enige buitelandse regering nie. Die maatskappy het ook die grootste deel van die voorraad van die Panama Railroad Company aangeskaf, wat egter steeds deur Amerikaners bestuur word.

De Lesseps het op 1 Januarie 1880 'n seremoniële aanvang van die werk opgevoer, maar ernstige grondverskuiwings het eers die volgende jaar begin. Namate die werk vorder, het ingenieurs geoordeel dat 'n seevlak-kanaal onuitvoerbaar was. De Lesseps, 'n promotor, maar nie 'n ingenieur nie, kon nie oortuig word voordat die werk vir ses jaar aangegaan het nie. Werklike arbeid aan 'n slotkanaal het eers in 1888 begin, toe die onderneming in 'n ernstige finansiële moeilikheid was. Op die hoogtepunt van sy bedrywighede het die onderneming ongeveer 10 000 werkers in diens gehad.

De Lesseps moes nie net te kampe hê met vyande wat finansiering belemmer het deur gerugte van mislukking te versprei en aandele en effekte op die mark te stort nie, maar ook met venale Franse politici en burokrate wat groot omkoopgeld geëis het vir die goedkeuring van die uitgifte van sekuriteite. Sy pogings om die Franse regering te kry om sy verbande te waarborg, is deur die Verenigde State geblokkeer op grond daarvan dat sulke optrede tot staatsbeheer sou lei in stryd met die Monroe -leerstuk. Die eindresultaat in Januarie 1889 was die aanstelling van 'n ontvanger om die onderneming te likwideer, waarna alle werk gestaak is.

Ondanks die rampspoedige finansiële ervaring van die Franse onderneming, is 'n geskatte twee-vyfde van die opgrawing wat vir die uiteindelike kanaal nodig was, voltooi. Baie hoofkwartiere en hospitaalgeboue is voltooi. Sommige van die masjinerie wat op die terrein gelaat is, was later bruikbaar en die spoorlyn is onderhou. 'N Ander erfenis van die bankrotskap van die Franse onderneming was 'n groot arbeidsmag, nou werkloos, meestal Antilliaanse swartes. Meer as die helfte is gerepatrieer, maar duisende het oorgebly, waarvan baie uiteindelik aan die kanaal van die Verenigde State gewerk het.

Gedurende die laaste helfte van die negentiende eeu het gewelddadige botsings tussen die ondersteuners van die liberale en konserwatiewe partye in Colombia die landery se sake in konstante woelinge gelaat. Plaaslike selfregering vir die departement van Panama is uitgebrei toe die liberale aan bewind was en teruggetrek het toe die konserwatiewes die oorhand gekry het. Die Katolieke Kerk is onder die liberale ontbind en weer onder die konserwatiewes gestig. Die lotgevalle van plaaslike partydiges het skielik en dikwels gewelddadig gestyg en geval.

Volgens een skatting was die tydperk getuie van veertig administrasies van die Panamese departement, vyftig onluste en opstand, vyf pogings tot afskeidings en dertien ingrypings deur die Verenigde State, wat handel onder die bepalings van die Bidlack-Mallarino-verdrag. Partydige botsings en buitelandse ingryping het rasse -teenstrydighede en ekonomiese probleme vererger en klagtes teen die sentrale regering van Colombia verskerp.

Tussen 1863 en 1886 het die eilandjie ses en twintig presidente gehad. Staatsgreep, rebellies en geweld was byna deurlopend, opgevoer deur troepe van die sentrale regering, deur plaaslike burgers teen sentraal opgelegde bevele en deur faksies sonder krag. Die chaotiese toestande wat onder die federalistiese grondwet van 1863 geheers het, het uitgeloop op die verkiesing van Rafael Núñez in 1884 as president van Colombia, ondersteun deur 'n koalisie van gematigde liberale en konserwatiewes. Núñez het alle faksies opgeroep om deel te neem aan 'n nuwe konstituerende vergadering, maar sy versoek is beantwoord deur 'n gewapende opstand van die radikale liberale.

Vroeg in 1885 het die Panama -krisis van 1885 plaasgevind. 'N Opstand onder leiding van 'n radikale liberale generaal wat in Panama-stad gesentreer is, het tot 'n tweerigtinggeveg ontwikkel. Colón is feitlik vernietig. Amerikaanse magte het op versoek van die Colombiaanse regering geland, maar was te laat om te verhoed dat die stad verbrand word. Miljoene dollars se eise is ingedien deur ondernemings en burgers van die Verenigde State, Frankryk en Brittanje, maar Colombia het suksesvol gepleit dat dit nie verantwoordelik is nie.

Bykomende Amerikaanse vlootmagte het beide Colón en Panama City beset en die spoorweg bewaak om ononderbroke vervoer te verseker totdat Colombiaanse magte geland het om die spoorweg te beskerm. Die nuwe grondwet van 1886 vestig die Republiek van Colombia as 'n eenheidstaat, met departemente wat duidelik ondergeskik was aan die sentrale regering. Panama is uitgesonder as onderhewig aan die direkte gesag van die regering. Die konsul-generaal van die Verenigde State het berig dat driekwart van die Panamese onafhanklikheid van Colombia wil hê en in opstand sal kom as hulle wapens kan kry en seker kan wees van die ingryping van die Verenigde State.

Panama is ingetrek in die duisend dae -oorlog van Colombia (1899–1902) deur opstandige radikale liberale wat hul toevlug tot Nicaragua geneem het. Net soos die res van Colombia, was die mening in Panama verdeeld, en opstand in die suidweste was skaars onderdruk toe liberale uit Nicaragua die kusstreek van die Stille Oseaan binnegeval het en byna daarin geslaag het om Panama-stad in die middel van 1900 in te neem. Die lotgevalle van die oorlog het verskil, en hoewel 'n plaaslike wapenstilstand ondersteuners van die Colombiaanse regering tydelike veiligheid in die Panama-Colón-gebied gegee het, was die rebelle in beheer van die land. Intussen was die rebelle vroeg in 1902 in die grootste deel van Colombia verslaan. Op daardie stadium het die Colombiaanse regering die Verenigde State gevra om in te tree en 'n wapenstilstand in Panama te bewerkstellig, wat aan boord van die USS gereël is Wisconsin in die Baai van Panama in 1902.

Gedurende die tydperk van onrus het die Verenigde State sy belang behou om 'n kanaal deur Nicaragua of Panama te bou. 'N Hindernis vir hierdie doelwit is in Desember 1901 oorkom toe die Verenigde State en Brittanje die Hay -Pauncefote -verdrag onderteken het. Hierdie verdrag het die bepalings van die Clayton -Bulwer -verdrag van 1850 tot niet gemaak en beteken dat die Britse aanvaarding van 'n kanaal wat slegs deur of onder die vaandel van die Verenigde State gebou is met waarborge van neutraliteit, beteken het.

Vlootoperasies tydens die Spaans -Amerikaanse oorlog (1898-1901) het die Amerikaanse president Theodore Roosevelt oortuig dat die Verenigde State 'n kanaal iewers in die Westelike Halfrond moes beheer. Hierdie belangstelling het 'n hoogtepunt bereik in die Spooner -wetsontwerp van 29 Junie 1902, wat voorsiening maak vir 'n kanaal deur die landengte van Panama en die Hay - Herrán -verdrag van 22 Januarie 1903, waaronder Colombia toestemming verleen het vir so 'n projek in die vorm van 'n 100 jaarhuur op 'n gebied van 10 kilometer breed. Hierdie verdrag is egter nie in Bogotá bekragtig nie, en die Verenigde State was vasbeslote om 'n kanaal oor die landamme te bou, het die Panamese afsonderingsbeweging intensief aangemoedig.

Teen Julie 1903, toe die verloop van interne Colombiaanse opposisie teen die Hay - Herrán -verdrag duidelik geword het, is 'n revolusionêre junta in Panama geskep. José Augustin Arango, 'n prokureur van die Panama Railroad Company, was die hoof van die junta. Manuel Amador Guerrero en Carlos C. Arosemena het van die begin af op die junta gedien, en vyf ander lede, almal uit vooraanstaande Panamese gesinne, is bygevoeg. Arango is beskou as die brein van die rewolusie, en Amador was die aktiewe leier van die junta.

Met finansiële hulp gereël deur Philippe Bunau-Varilla, 'n Franse burger wat die belange van Lesseps se onderneming verteenwoordig, het die inheemse Panamese leiers saamgesweer om voordeel te trek uit die Amerikaanse belang in 'n nuwe regime op die landmus. In Oktober en November 1903 het die revolusionêre junta, met die beskerming van die Amerikaanse vlootmagte, 'n suksesvolle opstand teen die Colombiaanse regering uitgevoer. Paradoksaal genoeg het die Verenigde State onder die Mallarino -Bidlack -verdrag van 1846 tussen die Verenigde State en Colombia opgetree - wat bepaal het dat die Amerikaanse magte kan ingryp in geval van wanorde op die landas om die Colombiaanse soewereiniteit en oop deurgang oor die landtang te waarborg - die Verenigde State verhinder 'n Colombiaanse mag wat oor die landas beweeg na Panama City om die opstand te onderdruk.

President Roosevelt erken die nuwe Panamese junta as die de facto-regering op 6 November 1903, de jure erkenning kom op 13 November. Vyf dae later, Bunau-Varilla, as die diplomatieke verteenwoordiger van Panama ('n rol wat hy gekoop het deur finansiële hulp aan die rebelle ) het die Isthmian Canal Convention met die buitelandse minister John Hay in Washington, DC, gesluit. Bunau-Varilla het sewentien jaar voor die voorval nie in Panama gewoon nie, en hy het nooit weer teruggekeer nie. Nietemin, terwyl hy in die Waldorf-Astoria Hotel in New York woon, skryf hy die Panamese verklaring van onafhanklikheid en grondwet en ontwerp die Panamese vlag. Istmiese patriotte was veral verontwaardig oor die haas waarmee Bunau-Varilla die verdrag gesluit het, 'n poging wat gedeeltelik bedoel is om besware van 'n aankomende Panamese afvaardiging te voorkom. Tog het die Panamese, sonder 'n skynbare alternatief, die verdrag op 2 Desember bekragtig, en goedkeuring deur die Amerikaanse senaat het op 23 Februarie 1904 gekom.

Die regte wat aan die Verenigde State toegestaan ​​is in die sogenaamde Hay – Bunau-Varilla-verdrag, was uitgebreid. Hulle het 'n toekenning ingesluit "voortdurend vir die gebruik, besetting en beheer" van 'n gebied van sestien kilometer breed en verlengings van drie seemyl in die see vanaf elke terminale "vir die konstruksie, onderhoud, werking, sanitasie en beskerming van 'n ismiese kanaal.

Verder was die Verenigde State geregtig om ekstra grond of water aan te skaf wat nodig is vir kanaaloperasies, en het die opsie om 'n uitnemende domein in Panama -stad uit te oefen. Binne hierdie gebied verkry Washington "alle regte, mag en gesag ... wat die Verenigde State sou besit en uitoefen as dit die soewerein was. Tot die volledige uitsluiting" van Panama.

Die Republiek van Panama het 'n de facto -protektoraat van die groter land geword deur twee bepalings waardeur die Verenigde State die onafhanklikheid van Panama gewaarborg het en in ruil daarvoor die reg gekry het om in Panama se binnelandse aangeleenthede in te gryp. Vir die regte wat dit verkry het, sou die Verenigde State die bedrag van US $ 10 miljoen en 'n annuïteit van 9 jaar na bekragtiging van US $ 250 000 in goud betaal. Die Verenigde State het ook die regte en eiendomme van die Franse kanaalmaatskappy vir $ 40 miljoen gekoop.

Colombia was destyds die sterkste kritikus van die Amerikaanse beleid. 'N Versoeningsverdrag met die Verenigde State van Amerika wat 'n vrywaring van $ 25 miljoen bied, is uiteindelik tussen hierdie twee lande in 1921 en uiteindelik teen 1922 gesluit. Ironies genoeg was die wrywing as gevolg van die gebeure van 1903 egter die grootste tussen die Verenigde State en Panama. Groot meningsverskille het ontstaan ​​oor die regte wat deur die verdrag van 1903 aan die Verenigde State verleen is en die Panamese grondwet van 1904. Die Amerikaanse regering het hierdie regte vervolgens geïnterpreteer dat die Verenigde State volkome soewereiniteit kon uitoefen oor alle aangeleenthede in die Canal Zone. Alhoewel Panama toegegee het dat die klousules vaag en onduidelik was, was dit later van mening dat die oorspronklike toegewing van gesag slegs betrekking het op die bou, werking en verdediging van die kanaal en dat regte en voorregte wat nie vir hierdie funksies nodig was nie, nooit prysgegee is nie.


Die verklaring van Panama se onafhanklikheidsdag: afskeiding uit Spanje

Aims McGuinness related that the ongoing wars for independence all around Latin America revived Panama’s ports for a while. The Spanish needed an alternative route, since they could not use the trade route out of war-torn Mexico.

But it soon ended when it became clear that Spain has lost its foothold in the continent. And so Panama’s elite, which included merchants and landowners, declared their independence from Spain.

The landmark moment happened first in Villa de los Santos and is remembered every November 10. The struggle reached its climax when it reached Panama City.

There, independence fighters urged Spanish soldiers to lay down their arms and duly succeeded. No blood was spilled in the fight for independence in the capital.

And so Panama Independence Day happened on November 28, 1821.


History of the Panama Canal

The idea of the Panama canal dates back to 1513, when Vasco Núñez de Balboa first crossed the isthmus. The narrow land bridge between North and South America houses the Panama Canal, a water passage between the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans. The earliest European colonists recognized this potential, and several proposals for a canal were made. [1]

By the late nineteenth century, technological advances and commercial pressure allowed construction to begin in earnest. Noted canal engineer Ferdinand de Lesseps led an initial attempt by France to build a sea-level canal. Beset by cost overruns due to the severe underestimation of the difficulties in excavating the rugged Panama land, heavy personnel losses in Panama due to tropical diseases, and political corruption in France surrounding the financing of the massive project, the canal was only partly complete.

Interest in a U.S.-led canal effort picked up as soon as France abandoned the project. Initially, the Panama site was politically unfavorable in the U.S. for a variety of reasons, including the taint of the failed French efforts and the Colombian government's unfriendly attitude towards the U.S. continuing the project. The U.S. first sought to construct a completely new canal through Nicaragua instead.

French engineer and financier Philippe-Jean Bunau-Varilla played a key role in changing U.S. attitudes. Bunau-Varilla had a large stake in the failed French canal company, and stood to make money on his investment only if the Panama Canal was completed. Extensive lobbying of U.S. lawmakers coupled with his support of a nascent independence movement among the Panamanian people led to a simultaneous revolution in Panama and the negotiation of the Hay–Bunau-Varilla Treaty which secured both independence for Panama and the right for the U.S. to lead a renewed effort to construct the canal. Colombia's response to the Panamanian independence movement was tempered by U.S. military presence the move is often cited as a classic example of the era of gunboat diplomacy.

U.S. success hinged on two factors. First was converting the original French sea-level plan to a more realistic lock-controlled canal. The second was controlling disease which decimated workers and management alike under the original French attempt. Initial chief engineer John Frank Stevens built much of the infrastructure necessary for later construction slow progress on the canal itself led to his replacement by George Washington Goethals. Goethals oversaw the bulk of the excavation of the canal, including appointing Major David du Bose Gaillard to oversee the most daunting project, the Culebra Cut through the roughest terrain on the route. Almost as important as the engineering advances was the healthcare advances made during the construction, led by William C. Gorgas, an expert in controlling tropical diseases such as yellow fever and malaria. Gorgas was one of the first to recognize the role of mosquitoes in the spread of these diseases, and by focusing on controlling the mosquitoes greatly improved worker conditions.

On 7 January 1914 the French crane boat Alexandre La Valley became the first to make the traverse, and on 1 April 1914 the construction was officially completed with the hand-over of the project from the construction company to the Canal Zone government. The outbreak of World War I caused the cancellation of any official "grand opening" celebration, and the canal officially opened to commercial traffic on 15 August 1914 with the transit of the SS Ancon.

During World War II, the canal proved a vital part of the U.S. military strategy, allowing ships to transfer easily between the Atlantic and Pacific. Politically, the Canal remained a territory of the United States until 1977, when the Torrijos–Carter Treaties began the process of transferring territorial control of the Panama Canal Zone to Panama, a process completed on 31 December 1999.

The Panama Canal continues to be a viable commercial venture and a vital link in world shipping, and continues to be periodically updated and maintained. The Panama Canal expansion project started construction in 2007 and began commercial operation on 26 June 2016. The new locks allow transit of larger Post-Panamax and New Panamax ships, which have a greater cargo capacity than the original locks could accommodate. [2]


Panama Independent From Columbia - History

Panama Canal (Fast Forward)

However, now that the Panama Canal is Panamanian property (not United States's), Panama is gaining revenue. In the first quarter of 2010, the Panama Canal made 360 million dollars. The revenue is expected to rise to 2 billion dollars. Even more, there is a project that will begin in 2014 that will double the canal's capacity, allowing larger ships to pass through. Panama's economy today is one of the most stable and robust in Central America. [5]

The first instance of the bloody and violent history of the American occupation of Panama began in 1964. Panamanian students attempted to raise a Panamanian flag in the Canal Zone controlled by the United States. This was their way of displaying their aspirations to rid Panama of Americans, who had placed multiple economic limitations on Panama, which crippled their economy. In reaction, the Americans tour down the flag and a riot ensued. Several civilians and military men were injured. Additionally, Panamanians torched American equipment and property in the Canal Zone. Despite this violent protest, the United States had no intentions of evacuating Panama. This initial riot represented much more than a bunch of students protesting, it exemplified the Panamanian’s willingness to fight the American’s for their rights. The 1960’s and 1970’s where plagued by an economic downslide for the Panamanians and many questioned the “United States commitment to social progress and reform… specifically whether the Alliance for progress represents a policy of friendship or merely colonialism in disguise.” [7]

In 1977, President Jimmy Carter agreed to slowly begin restoring the Panama Canal back into Panama’s control. This process would last until 1999, when the Canal would be officially handed over. However, from 1977-1999, tensions between the United States and Panama once again reached a climax and American interference in Panamanian affairs peaked.

General Antonio Noriega became a military dictator in Panama. He was originally favored by the United States when he aided them in their battles with Cuba and Nicaragua, but he allowed drug dealers to travel and access illegal money without punishment. In fact, while H.W. Bush was the head of the CIA, Noreiga's salary was increased by $100,000 a year. However, as Noriega's obedience to the United States faltered, the control over the Panama Canal became worrisome. For several years, the United States monitored Noriega, and in 1989 they took action. When American invaded, the United Nations ruled the invasion as a violation of Panama’s freedom, hiding the ulterior motives. Panamanians were glad to be free from the military dictator for a short time, but their agitation turned into outrage when in December of 1989, when an American Marine was shot and killed, the United States dropped bombs four days before Christmas on Panama. ”The invasion of 1989 killed an estimated 4,000 civilians and leveled densely populated areas.” Many then realized that the United States military resurgence in Panama was a ploy to regain control over the canal. A Panamanian citizen is quoted saying, “ we want to get out of this Goddamn place, we’re tired of this! This is not democracy! They are worse than Noriega, they are plenty worse! ” [8]

The Panama Deception

In 1903, America began to imperialize the Columbian territory of Panama Panama was appealing to the United States due to its superb location. The United States was intrigued so much by Panama that they convinced rebel groups to take arms against the Colombians with the support of American troops and resources. The Panamanians won their independence from Colombia, but the American government, who only initially aided Panama for their location, instantaneously restrained them. For the next century following 1903, Panama would be constrained and utilized as a tool for the United States trade and economy. Following the United State’s occupation of Panama in 1903, a period began where each nation’s desires became increasingly hard to satisfy. After the Panama Canal was finished in 1914, the United States attempted to control all the profits made from the passing. The U.S. looked to imperialize Panama rather than work in unison with them. This was contrary to the propaganda the United States told the Panamanian government, which consisted of lies that the Panama Canal would be most profitable to the citizens of Panama. The people, who truly profited from the Canal, were the wealthy U.S. businessmen and investors. Because of this, The United States wanted to take control of Panama and use the country as a source of profit exclusively. Contrary, Panama was becoming increasingly disgruntled with the militia occupying the Canal Zone, which was now considered a territory of the United States.

At the end of 1999, the Panama Canal was given to the people of Panama and an era of United States imperialism ended. America reined supreme over the Canal Zone for nearly a century, and they were attracted to the land for its great potential in economic growth. Unfortunately, America’s occupation of Panama is overshadowed by the horrific and violent history the two countries shared. Instead of an economic catalyst, the Panama Canal only aggravated tensions between the United States and Panama. Thousands of people were injured and several riots erupted. It is undeniable the injustice, which America did Panama. Although The United States benefitted the Panamanians slightly by decreasing the death rate, in this case, the cons outweigh the pros there are just too many unfortunate consequences in Panama that the United States was guilty for. In the future, one can only hope that America will not be looked upon as “an empire that plunders people and takes their resources,” but as an ally and friend. [6]

[6] Theodossopoulos D. With or Without Gringos: When Panamanians Talk about the United States and Its Citizens. Social Analysis [serial online]. May 30, 201054(1):52-70. Available from: Academic Search Complete, Ipswich, MA. Accessed J a Social Analysis [serial online]. May 30, 2010 54(1): 52-70. Available from: Academic Search Complete, Ipswich, MA. Acessed Ja nuary 15, 2012.

[7] Armbrister T. PANAMA: WHY THEY HATE US. Saturday Evening Post [serial online]. March 7, 1964237(9):75-79. Available from: Academic Search Complete, Ipswich, MA. Accessed January 16, 2012.


  • OFFICIAL NAME: Republic of Panama
  • FORM OF GOVERNMENT: Constitutional democracy
  • CAPITAL: Panama City
  • POPULATION: 3,800,644
  • OFFICIAL LANGUAGE: Spanish, English
  • AREA: 29,118 square miles (75,416 square kilometers)
  • MONEY: Balboa, U.S. dollar

AARDRYKSKUNDE

This Central American country is bordered by Costa Rica and Colombia, and is situated between the Caribbean Sea and the North Pacific Ocean. Panama is a narrow land bridge, or isthmus, connecting North and South America. Panama is slightly smaller than South Carolina.

Map created by National Geographic Maps

PEOPLE & CULTURE

Most Panamanians are descended from indigenous, or native, people, Europeans, Afro-Caribbeans, and immigrants from all over the world.

The three largest indigenous groups in Panama are the Kunas, Emberás, and Ngöbe-Buglés and they still live in the remote areas of the country.

They have their own dialects, languages, and customs and most of them also speak Spanish.

The national traditional dress for women is a long, full white cotton dress decorated with colorful embroidery called a pollera. Men wear a traditional montuno, which is a white cotton shirt with embroidery and short pants.

Family is very important in Panama. Children attend school from ages 7 to 15. Most of Panama’s national holidays are religious occasions.

Panamanians eat rice with most of their meals. They also eat corn tortillas with meat and vegetables.

NATURE

The country is very diverse with mountains, rain forests, beautiful white-sand beaches, and 1,500 islands. Darién Gap, from Panama City to Colombia, has about 12 million acres of rain forest, yet few Panamanians or tourists ever visit the area, which is only accessible by boat.

This remote nature preserve is threatened by development and the proposed extension of the Pan-American Highway through this region.

The national flower is a white orchid called the Flor del Espiritu Santo, or Flower of the Holy Spirit. There are over 1,400 tree species, including the square tree, which has a square shaped trunk and is found in the mountains west of Panama City.

Panama is home to many unique animals that are found only in Panama. The mysterious golden frogs have gleaming, shimmering skin and are thought to bring people good luck. The numbers of golden frogs is declining and so are the numbers of sea turtles.

GOVERNMENT & ECONOMY

Under the constitution, there are three branches of government, including the executive, legislative, and judicial branches. Panamanians elect a president and a vice president every five years. The president picks a cabinet of ministers.

After years of government corruption, Panama instituted many laws to focus on human rights, and to make the government more transparent to its citizens.

Panama’s agricultural products are bananas, rice, corn, beans, and coffee.

GESKIEDENIS

Explored and settled by the Spanish in the 16th century, Panama broke with Spain in 1821 and joined with Colombia, Ecuador, and Venezuela to form the Republic of Gran Colombia. When this republic dissolved in 1830, Panama remained part of Colombia.

With U.S. backing, Panama split from Colombia in 1903 and signed a treaty, which allowed the U.S. to control a strip of land on either side of a new canal.

The Panama Canal, built by the United States after Panama's independence from Colombia in 1903, joins the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans. The canal was built by 75,000 workers between 1904 and 1914 and allows boats to sail between the two oceans without having to go all the way around the South American continent.


Panamanian Independence & Political Intervention by the United States

Many recognize Panama as the small, tropical nation located on the isthmus, a narrow strip of land with sea on either side, forming a link between two larger areas of land, of Central America. Panama contains a history of colonization and neo-colonization that can be similarly related to many Latin American countries. I plan to highlight and discuss historical issues that have arisen from such facets. This paper will be an accumulation of my research on Panamanian history. Importantly, I look to engage with the question of how U.S. intervention in Panama’s struggle for independence from Colombia affected the ideological aspirations of the country?

The structure of the paper will appear with historical context, the means of U.S. intervention, and the results of U.S. and Panamanian relationships following the war for independence. The section on historical context will briefly cover Panamanian history as it relates to the encompassing topics of Latin American history. This section will also feature a focus on the political and ideological aspirations of Panamanians leading up to a revolution. The section to follow will cover the reasons for U.S. intervention in the political affairs of Panama and Colombia. The final section provides a comparative analysis of the results of U.S. and Panamanian relationship and the means to which the U.S. gained their canal concessions. The final section is where my historical question will be answered. Ultimately, the purpose of my independent research project is to exemplify intervention in the Panamanian independence struggle as a result of the U.S. imperialism and neocolonial practice. Further, I seek to describe how these implications diverted the purpose of Panamanian insurrection from Colombia to fit the interests of the United States.

Firstly, the matter of European colonization must be addressed as it the beginning of foreign intervention in the Americas. Panama, or the land of, was discovered for Europe by Spanish Conquistador Rodrigo De Bastidas and his crew in 1501. The colonization of the land and indigenous peoples of the Isthmus would promptly follow the arrival of Bastidas. The land was formally navigated and mapped by Bastidas’ first mate, Vasco Núñez de Balboa who, twelve years after the discovery of the land, would be the colonizers to “discover” the Pacific Ocean to the East of the Isthmus. Interestingly, the map-work of Balboa has accustomed him as a national hero in Panamanian culture.

Panama’s long history is often related to that of Colombia. During the colonial era (1492-1810), Panama was merely a province of the Viceroyalty of New Grenada. The liberation of New Grenada during the Latin American wars of independence would allow for Panamanian independence from Spain. As the forces of Simón Bolívar campaigned through Northern portion of South America in the early 19 th century, many Peninsulares fled to Panama, but, as battles waged on, the Peninsulares and colonizers began to leave the province of Panama. Panama would witness a “bloodless revolution” as the separatists faced zero causalities when they formally gained independence from Spain. On November 10, 1821, separatist leader José de Fábrega declared Panama as a free state, however, fear of Spanish retaliation to a militarily and economically weak Panama resulted in the new nation joining the Republic of Gran Colombia. The historical trajectory of Panama would be sequestered to Colombia for the remainder of the century.

The decades to follow the wars of independence would prove to be rife with political unrest. The central government of Gran Colombia was weak and disputes between federalists and centralists caused major political rifts that could not be mediated. Gran Colombia would dissolve and the Republic of New Grenada would take its place, Panama would maintain its status as a province to the new governing republic. Political altercations and dissolutions of central governments would be a common occurrence for Colombia and its states throughout the 19 th century, this common overturning caused resentful attitudes among the republic’s provinces. Panama, and other regional states, would consistently challenge the central power. Panamanian politician Justo Arosemena would spend his career demanding autonomy for Panama. Arosemena wrote many articles detailing the specific experiences of Panama the most famous of which, El Estado Federal de Panamá (1855), would give Justo Arosemena the title of father of Panamanian nationality. Many of Arosemena’s articles called for the reorganization of Latin American sovereignty and an end to “Yankee intervention,” in Latin America. The declaration for Latin American confederations where states would maintain respective autonomy but function as one to deter foreign intervention was integral to Arosemena’s ideology. Importantly, the writing of Arosemena would become key for Panamanian separatists and it would be called upon countless of times in the latter half of the 19 th century. 1

By the 1880s, Panamanian insurgents were taking full stride in their movement for succession. Depending on the party in power, the status of Panama was up for debate, either sovereign or department. Panamanians vowed to become completely self-governed and cease their subordination to Colombia. The military might of Colombia was greater than that of the Panamanian insurgents and military occupation of major Panamanian cities became common in the 1880s. Likewise, U.S. troops and naval ships had been dispersed throughout the region to uphold many of their own business and trade interests. The separatist movement was assumed to diminish which would result in Panamanian aspirations of self-governance to end and political purgatory would continue. 2

During the time of the Panamanian independence struggle, the United States naval forces were present in many locations of Latin America, the isthmus was no exception. American intervention had taken root almost immediately after the word of the insurgency had reached Washington. The U.S. deployed military services to the isthmus to uphold agreements of neutrality established by the Mallarino-Bidlack Treaty (1846), which allowed the U.S. to provide ample intervention in Colombian affairs when U.S. interests, such as interference in the isthmian/Panamanian railway system. U.S. leaders could not allow civil disputes to disrupt their economic interests. The initial interaction for U.S. involvement was to protect their business ventures. As the armed struggle between Colombian conservatives and liberal factions escalated, U.S. lawmakers, backed by private business owners, began to take the opportunity of Colombia’s unstable situation to seek out other goals, a canal.

The premise of the canal through the Central American Isthmus had been long sought, even back to the days of Bastidas when he established control over the land. Yet, an overly ambitious Presidency of the United States’ Theodore Roosevelt, whose eagerness for war paralleled that of the rightly named Warhawks of nearly a century prior, and aspects of empire building and explicit ideologies of Western superiority over Latin America had allowed for ample conditions to begin a U.S. overtaking of the Panamanian war effort. To clarify, the induction of “rightful intervention” proposed by the Monroe Doctrine (1823) allowed for the engagement in foreign policy by the U.S. during the 19 th century that had resulted in the intrinsic practices and methods depicted with that of neocolonialism and imperialism over Latin American nations. Such examples can be seen with the imposition of U.S. occupation or involvement in internal affairs of Latin American countries, one being the Mallarino-Bidlack Treaty (1846), the same treaty that allowed U.S. interaction in the Panamanian independence struggle. Likewise, the ideology of the superiority of the United States over Latin America was vastly agreed upon. Such sentiments by westerners were common of the time period and can be viewed in works such as Rudyard Kipling’s 1899 poem A White Man’s Burden, in which he addresses the need for U.S. neocolonial practices as a need to save the nations of “colored people” by intervention that would deliver modernization. 3

Such aspects of the one exemplified in the paragraph prior are reasons for the establishment of an international environment that implied that it would be immoral and unjust for the U.S. to intervene in the affairs of Latin America, doing so would benefit the U.S. greatly, in terms of military and economy. Further, with the reasoning, the U.S. had great interest in establishing some amount of control over the Central American Isthmus.

Sole ownership of a canal through the isthmus would provide a great addition to the U.S. economy, as they could establish the cost of access fees and travel through a Central American Canal would prove to be quicker and more cost-efficient for a company than to deliver their goods “around the horn,” around Argentina and through the Strait of Magellan. Access to a canal would allow the U.S. to combine its naval forces in the Pacific and Atlantic Oceans to become connected. Such an aspect was vastly important as the Spanish-American War, ending in 1898 which was a year before the official beginning of Panama’s fight for independence, as a victory proved the U.S. that they needed to be able to transfer military resource between oceans quicker, especially to maintain control of their newly acquired territories, Hawaii and the Philippines. Likewise, creating an isthmian canal would instantly add great prestige to U.S. engineering as the canal had only been imagined and theorized for 500 years. Only one issue stood between the U.S. and their canal, access. 4

The Colombian government engaged in negotiations with the U.S. over access to the land in Panama for canal building, however, the ratification of agreements often failed. Many times, Colombian politicians in the legislative body failed to ratify treaties such as the Hay–Herrán Treaty (1903). The Hay–Herrán Treaty, if ratified in early 1903, would have supplied the U.S. in access to a canal in exchange for payments and suppression of the Panamanian insurgents. As negotiations with Colombian became ever more tiresome for the U.S., the country decided to divert their assistance to Panamanians in their independence struggle. This choice was calculated greatly, as a victory for the insurgents would allow the U.S. to conduct negotiations with a fledging nation and, in hope, gain greater concessions for a canal.

In sum, the U.S. had their own intentions of neutrality but began to make efforts to seize the means to create a canal. U.S. foreign policy, ideologies of superiority, and an imperious President had allowed the U.S. to create an environment to engage in such practices of intervention between the countries for personal interests. Ultimately, U.S.-Colombian negotiations had become stale and produced the U.S. backed Panamanian insurgency, which was hoped to establish easier canal concessions to the U.S. The U.S. had helped the Panamanians gain independence from Colombia, establishing the Republic of Panama in 1903, and advert a long bloody struggle however, the implications for the Panamanian ideology would be great.

The means of these concessions are not left to the imagination. The 19 th Century is filled with examples of the U.S. gaining great concessions to war through what some call “gunboat diplomacy.” One such example is the “independent nations” of Puerto Rico and Cuba after the end of the Spanish-American War, the result of a U.S. victory allowed the U.S. to lead the end of war negotiations and instill legislative provisions to effectively maintain control over the islands. A similar occurrence appeared with the new Panamanian Republic as much of the negotiations between the U.S. and Panama were led by former Secretary of State John Hay.

The question is not whether Hay had directly threatened to use U.S. military forces to gain adequate concessions for the U.S., but rather how the implications affected negotiations. Without a direct threat, Panamanian politicians could draw the conclusion that the U.S. had assisted in succession for personal interests and, if not satisfied with their spoils of war, could easily take aim for direct annexation. The best course for Panamanians was to concede in fear of another war with a greater combatant than that of Colombia. Likewise, it is described that former Panamanian Ambassador to the U.S., Phillipe Bunau-Varilla, had been the focus of U.S. lobbyists and continued practice of unauthorized negotiations over the canal. 5

Most of these aspects of the end of war negotiations would affect not only the treaties but Panamanian legislation as a whole. First, the Hay-Bunau-Varilla Treaty (1903) effectively established a 16 km zone of construction through Panama for the U.S. to create a canal, the area would later be known as the Canal Zone. Agreements on the treaty gave the U.S. allowance to take defensive action to protect their zone. Likewise, provisions such as Article 136 of the Panamanian Constitution (1903) would give the United States, “the right to intervene in any part of Panama, to re-establish public peace and constitutional order,” and the U.S. would exercise the rights of this constitutional article to perform such actions like the deployment of U.S. troops to handle political riots in Panamanian cities or abolish the Panamanian military. The land for canal construction, and access to Panama, was exchanged for payments and rents to Panama. Effectively, the results of the end of war treaties and negotiations between the U.S. and Panama resulted in Panama becoming a de facto protectorate to the U.S. empire.

What remains to be assessed is the question of Panamanian political ideologies. As I stated, Panamanian independence was an ideology of self-governance and autonomy from that of Colombia. Of course, the addition of U.S. assistance in succession resulted in complete separation from Colombia and the establishment of the Panamanian Republic, however, the fact of the matter is Panama’s position in relation to the U.S. Panama had become a protectorate and as such became directed with regards to U.S. interests of building a canal. In sum, Panama’s aspirations for self-governance were diverted due to U.S. intervention. Complete autonomy for Panama and her people would not be granted as a subject to the U.S. and such a reality could be seen in the years to follow as the canal zone became inaccessible to Panamanians and the occupation and deployment of U.S. troops into Panama became relatively common. Panama would not see separation from the U.S. until the late 20 th century and the successionist ideology viewed by Arosemena and other Panamanians would not be fully accomplished.

1: Howland, Douglas and Luise White, The State of Sovereignty: Territories, Laws, Populations. Bloomington, Indiana: University of Indiana Press, 2009. Pgs 26-29

2: Delgado, Luis Martinez, Panamá: Su Independencia de España, Su Incorporación a la Gran Colombia, Su Separación de Colombia –el Canal Interoceánico. Bogotá: Ediciones Lerner, 1972.

3: O’Toole, G.J.A., The Spanish War: An American Epic-1898. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 1984.

Kipling, Rudyard, A White Man’s Burden. New York: Doubleday and McClure, 1899


Panama Independent From Columbia - History

Naval operations during the Spanish-American War (1898-1901) served to convince President Theodore Roosevelt that the United States needed to control a canal somewhere in the Western Hemisphere. This interest culminated in the Spooner Bill of June 29, 1902, providing for a canal through the isthmus of Panama, and the Hay-Herr n Treaty of January 22, 1903, under which Colombia gave consent to such a project in the form of a 100-year lease on an area 10 kilometers wide. This treaty, however, was not ratified in Bogot , and the United States, determined to construct a canal across the isthmus, intensively encouraged the Panamanian separatist movement.

By July 1903, when the course of internal Colombian opposition to the Hay-Herr n Treaty became obvious, a revolutionary junta had been created in Panama. Jos Augustin Arango, an attorney for the Panama Railroad Company, headed the junta. Manuel Amador Guerrero and Carlos C. Arosemena served on the junta from the start, and five other members, all from prominent Panamanian families, were added. Arango was considered the brains of the revolution, and Amador was the junta's active leader.

With financial assistance arranged by Philippe Bunau-Varilla, a French national representing the interests of de Lesseps's company, the native Panamanian leaders conspired to take advantage of United States interest in a new regime on the isthmus. In October and November 1903, the revolutionary junta, with the protection of United States naval forces, carried out a successful uprising against the Colombian government. Acting, paradoxically, under the Bidlack-Mallarino Treaty of 1846 between the United States and Colombia--which provided that United States forces could intervene in the event of disorder on the isthmus to guarantee Colombian sovereignty and open transit across the isthmus --the United States prevented a Colombian force from moving across the isthmus to Panama City to suppress the insurrection.

President Roosevelt recognized the new Panamanian junta as the de facto government on November 6, 1903 de jure recognition came on November 13. Five days later Bunau-Varilla, as the diplomatic representative of Panama (a role he had purchased through financial assistance to the rebels) concluded the Isthmian Canal Convention with Secretary of State John Hay in Washington. Bunau-Varilla had not lived in Panama for seventeen years before the incident, and he never returned. Nevertheless, while residing in the Waldorf-Astoria Hotel in New York City, he wrote the Panamanian declaration of independence and constitution and designed the Panamanian flag. Isthmian patriots particularly resented the haste with which BunauVarilla concluded the treaty, an effort partially designed to preclude any objections an arriving Panamanian delegation might raise. Nonetheless, the Panamanians, having no apparent alternative, ratified the treaty on December 2, and approval by the United States Senate came on February 23, 1904.

The rights granted to the United States in the so-called HayBunau -Varilla Treaty were extensive. They included a grant "in perpetuity of the use, occupation, and control" of a sixteenkilometer -wide strip of territory and extensions of three nautical miles into the sea from each terminal "for the construction, maintenance, operation, sanitation, and protection" of an isthmian canal.

Furthermore, the United States was entitled to acquire additional areas of land or water necessary for canal operations and held the option of exercising eminent domain in Panama City. Within this territory Washington gained "all the rights, power, and authority . . . which the United States would possess and exercise if it were the sovereign . . . to the entire exclusion" of Panama.

The Republic of Panama became a de facto protectorate of the larger country through two provisions whereby the United States guaranteed the independence of Panama and received in return the right to intervene in Panama's domestic affairs. For the rights it obtained, the United States was to pay the sum of US$10 million and an annuity, beginning 9 years after ratification, of US$250,000 in gold coin. The United States also purchased the rights and properties of the French canal company for US$40 million.

Colombia was the harshest critic of United States policy at the time. A reconciliatory treaty with the United States providing an indemnity of US$25 million was finally concluded between these two countries in 1921. Ironically, however, friction resulting from the events of 1903 was greatest between the United States and Panama. Major disagreements arose concerning the rights granted to the United States by the treaty of 1903 and the Panamanian constitution of 1904. The United States government subsequently interpreted these rights to mean that the United States could exercise complete sovereignty over all matters in the Canal Zone. Panama, although admitting that the clauses were vague and obscure, later held that the original concession of authority related only to the construction, operation, and defense of the canal and that rights and privileges not necessary to these functions had never been relinquished.


Kyk die video: Demolition, disease, and death: Building the Panama Canal - Alex Gendler (Mei 2022).


Kommentaar:

  1. Hlinka

    Dit is spesiaal geregistreer om aan bespreking deel te neem.

  2. Vemados

    Bravo, what is the right phrase ... brilliant idea

  3. Faegor

    Idee skud, ek ondersteun.

  4. Argyle

    Ek sluit aan. Dit was ook by my. Kom ons bespreek hierdie kwessie.

  5. Huntingtun

    Lank gelede so 'n antwoord gesoek



Skryf 'n boodskap