Experts questioned the attitude of the Panamanian authorities, who consider the Neutrality Treaty to be violent

“Refunds” to warships that pass through the Channel, agreements to increase the presence of US military troops in the country and public repudiation of China. In return, there is not even a firm commitment that there will be no military invasion to take control of the interoceanic route.

“Refunds” to warships that pass through the Channel, agreements to increase the presence of US military troops in the country and public repudiation of China. In return, there is not even a firm commitment that there will be no military invasion to take control of the interoceanic route.

When asked directly if the United States recognizes Panama’s sovereignty over the Channel, Hegseth replied:

“We understand that the Panama Canal is in Panama and the protection of the sovereignty of Panama of malicious influence is important. That’s why when President Trump says we are going to recover the Panama Canal from China’s influence, it means that we are partners in Panama and the United States. That involves the partnership between the United States and Panama. We are grateful that you have welcomed US troops on Panamanian soil by invitation, through joint rotating exercises. It is an opportunity to revive, whether it is a military base, a naval station or another location where US troops can work with Panamanian troops to increase their capabilities and cooperate. We received the opportunity to have an increased presence of troops here with the Panamanians to ensure the sovereignty of the Panama Canal,” said the Secretary of Defense. Regarding whether the presence would be permanent, he commented “in the end we expect a long-term relationship with the country of Panama and that would be in deliberation with the leadership of Panama.”

Tolls through the Canal

One of the main claims of US President Donald Trump is the “unfair” collection of tolls from US military vessels. The Neutrality Treaty establishes that U.S. warships will be given expeditiously, but makes it clear that a nation cannot be exempt from tolls.

However, Panama signed a joint declaration declaring its intention to seek a mechanism in which Panama would end up reimbursing the United States after collecting the toll to achieve what the Minister of Channel Affairs, José Ramón Icaza, called “neutral cost.”

Criticism against statement to seek ‘neutral cost’ in the Canal

“The declaration says that we will look for a mechanism in which warships and auxiliary ships will have a compensation system for services, that is, a way to ensure that it has a neutral cost,” Icaza explained. “What he seeks is to later sit down to look for a compensation mechanism for the services that the Panama Canal requires and needs and in that way we can then seek compensation for the transits of warships,” the minister added.

“It establies a level of exemption, trying or pretending to make it see that it is the same regime that is applied to cruise ships that cross the Panama Canal,” said lawyer Ebrahim Asvat. “Cruise ships receive a tax incentive in Panama, which are refundable over time, due to the fact that they mobilize tourism through Panama, and have the possibility that these tourists go down to Panamanian territory, make excursions and go on to carry out some types of shopping activities while they are on Panamanian soil. However, the Neutrality Treaty is violated when a regime is established where the Panamanian State is now forced to pay the tolls to the Canal Authority of the United States warships that cross the canal, in addition to the right they already had to have an expedited passage,” he questioned.

For Asvat, it is unnecessary for Panama to assume the cost and violate the Neutrality Treaty, which must guarantee equity to all countries and to the ships of all countries of the world. It also questions the lack of transparency of the government of Mulino that has signed agreements without the prior consent or knowledge of the Panamanian population.

Opines that the strategy in the face of Trump’s threats is patience and resistance. “Trump has to live in the world and there is an international community that he has to be part of. Pretending to isolate yourself and impose a position on the world without negotiation, without reaching agreements, but unilaterally, is not something that will work for Donald Trump. I think Panama can wait, because today it could be next to Panama and tomorrow it will get tangled in another issue. I think you have to be very patient in the face of this type of threat. If there really is friendship and a long tradition of partners between the United States and Panama, we do not deserve this type of treatment,” he said.

“The position of the government of Panama and particularly of the head of government is very embarrassing,” said the former magistrate of the Supreme Court of Justice, Graciela Dixon. “If they had thrown this as a story for me, I wouldn’t have believed it. You would have to be too cowardly to engage in behaviors that involve the surrender of the State, of the country, to the domain of the United States. I would never have imagined that a Panamanian, a Panamanian president would do what this gentleman has done to sign an agreement. An understanding with the United States Military Force, with the United States government to authorize them to tour our territories, to patrol our waters, to provide us, in quotation marks, security,” he said.