巴拿馬政府對運河移轉與基地談判之基本政策

Negotiations over the Transfer of the Panama Canal: Panamanian Strategy and Policy

美國從簽訂地峽運河協定之後，就認定在運河區有行使主權的權利。然而巴拿馬卻認為相關條款隱晦不明，並且認為原本巴方只是對運河的建造、營運和防衛做出部分的讓步，此外的權利和特權則並未讓渡給美國。美巴各持己見互不相讓的態度，曾使雙方在六○年代中期於運河區爆發衝突，並兩次導致短期終止外交關系。不過與美國糾纏不清的關係，以及因為運河所滋生的各種問題，向來就是巴拿馬歷史特色的一部分。然而巴拿馬軍事強人陶立賀在六○年代末期的崛起，卻改變了巴拿馬在運河談判的弱勢，從而確立了美國歸還運河的政策走向。陶立賀的個人信念及其在運河談判中的堅定立場，遂成為往後巴拿馬政治領導人對運河移轉與基地談判的榜樣。由於巴拿馬一向懷疑美國有歸還運河的誠意，因此如何解決巴拿馬和美國就運河歸還所產生的歧見，如何妥善安排運河移轉過程，以及如何順利經營歸還後的運河，已成為巴拿馬歷任政治領導人施政的重心和對外政策的要點。

After the Isthmian Canal Convention was signed at the beginning of the 20th century, the United States considered the Pamama Canal Zone as being under its sovereignty. Nevertheless, Panama argued that the treaty was ambiguous and thus never conceded any right or privilege to the United States other than the right to build, manage, and defend the Canal. Due to this controversy, there were constant conflicts in the Canal Zone between the two sides in the 1960s, a dispute which even lead to a temporary break in diplomatic relations between the two sides. This controversy has been part of Panamanian history. At the end of the 1960s, however, the Panamanian strong man Omar Torrijos was able to change the weak position of Panama and pushed the United States into an agreement to return the Canal. Torrijos' personal beliefs and firm position in the negotiations has become a model for later Panamanian leaders in negotiations surrounding the Canal transfer and the maintenance of related bases. Given that the Panamanian leaders have doubted U.S. sincerity regarding the return of the Canal, Panamanian domestic and foreign policy have been based on three issues: 1. How to resolve the controversy produced by the return of the Canal? 2. How to properly arrange the transfer of the Canal? 3. How can Panama manage the Canal on its own?