Foreign Relations of the United States, 1977–1980, Volume XXIX, Panama

109. Memorandum From Secretary of State Vance to President Carter¹

Washington, October 10, 1977

1. Panama: Warren had an afternoon session with Bob Byrd on the Joint Statement of Interpretation concerning the neutrality and operation of the Panama Canal. Byrd seemed to be favorably disposed to this approach and offered to invite the following Senators with whom you will be meeting tomorrow morning at 8:00 am:²

Baker	Eastland	Nunn
Case	Goldwater	Sparkman
Church	Inouye	Stennis
Cranston	Jackson	Stevens

I am attaching an initial draft of the Joint Statement³ which was given to Byrd this afternoon. As you will note, we did not add “in time of national emergency” at the end of the “when necessary” clause in the second paragraph. I believe we will have greater flexibility of action without a qualification of this clause. In our view the last two paragraphs of the Joint Statement should only apply to the Treaty after the year 2000, since we will be able to control passage through the Canal until that year.

Byrd did not raise the question of a reservation with us. He said that if the Joint Statement is ultimately adopted, the Senate would then have to decide how to take it into account. If we could persuade the Senate to use the Joint Statement as an expression of its understanding (rather than a formal reservation), we would avoid opening up the Treaties to other reservations.

Attached also are talking points⁴ for your use with the Senators tomorrow morning.

2. Panama Canal Treaties Hearings: The Senate Foreign Relations Committee today took testimony on the Canal Treaties from retired Admirals Moorer and Zumwalt and from retired General Maxwell Taylor. Moorer opposes the treaties, the other two are in favor.

In Moorer’s view, already expressed to the House International Affairs Committee,⁵ we must be present in the Canal to insure our access to it. The proposed treaties provide for our withdrawal in 22 years, a time that “is just around the corner” in the Admiral’s view. Moorer sees a Moscow-Havana-Panama axis, a view which led Senator Baker to request the Committee to require the State Department to provide an analysis of the possible relationship between the USSR and Panama should the treaties be ratified. In questioning Moorer, Senator Glenn called upon the State Department to respond as quickly as possible to the Committee’s letter concerning the provisions of “expeditious passage” and “intervention” in the treaties. Senator Percy had a further request of the State Department: that it provide a list of visits by Torrijos to Cuba as compared with his visits to democratic Latin Republics, say Venezuela.

Zumwalt said the Canal was important to US security. Access to it would be better insured with the treaties than without them. He would like to see a clarification by both governments of the matter about which there now seems to be divergent interpretation, especially “expeditious passage” and Article IV of the Neutrality Treaty.

The treaties would be in danger, Taylor thinks, if the US sought to obtain Panama’s agreement to greater precision in the provisions upon which there is seeming differences of interpretation. The generalities are purposeful, and provide for freedom of action. To seek Panama’s agreement to a specific provision for US “intervention” would be absurd, in Taylor’s view.

After the Admirals and the General testified, the Committee heard the testimony of four American residents of the Canal Zone in their capacity as leaders of civic councils. They oppose the treaties.

[Omitted here is information unrelated to Panama.]

1. Source: Carter Library, National Security Affairs, Brzezinski Material, Subject File, Box 19, Evening Reports (State), 10/77. Secret. Carter initialed the memorandum and wrote: “Cy.”
2. According to the President’s Daily Diary, on October 11 Carter met with Byrd and other senators to discuss the Panama Canal treaties from 8 to 9 a.m. From 9 to 9:08 a.m. Carter met alone with Byrd. (Carter Library, Presidential Materials, President’s Daily Diary) In his diary, Carter wrote that during the meeting with the senators, “All of us approved a clarification statement that might be signed by me and Torrijos. I don’t think there’s any possibility of having the treaty ratified unless the question of our right to protect the canal after the year 2000 is clarified and also the right of expeditious passage in case of a national emergency.” (Carter, White House Diary, p. 117)
3. Not attached.
4. Not attached. A copy of the talking points for the October 11 morning meeting with the senators is in the Department of State, Records of Cyrus R. Vance, 1977–1980, Lot 84D241, Box 8, Panama Canal 1977–78.
5. See footnote 3, Document 83.