48. Letter From the Governor of the Panama Canal Zone (Parker) to the Deputy Under Secretary of the Army (Koren)1
For some time I have felt that our treaty negotiations are generally proceeding on the wrong course, and that we should be on a path which is about 90 degrees from the one we are now following.
From the days of President Johnson it has been the stated policy of the Administration that we are going to turn the Canal over to Panama at some point of time, and that we are going to go through a transition period of returning various elements of jurisdiction and sovereignty to them. Our negotiators have visualized a rather long, drawn-out period during which our rights will gradually be whittled away, and yet during which we will be responsible for operation of the waterway. I think this is really the worst of all possible arrangements.
The longer we stretch out our responsibility for running the Canal with diminishing rights, the more problems we are going to cause [Page 135] for management and for everyone connected with the Canal in both governments. Further, we lose the opportunity to create goodwill in Panama, jeopardize our relations following the long, drawn-out period, and gain nothing in public relations with the rest of the world. It is generally my view that if we are going to give the Canal back to Panama anyway, the faster we do it the better, provided we retain for the United States during that period of transition essentially the same rights we have today.
Paul Runnestrand has put these ideas together in a paper called “New Treaty Concept.”2 I am forwarding a copy of the paper for your information. I support it and think this is the way we should go.