I think that this was a great response to a really over critical article by the New York Times and puts in perspective what The Panama Canal is all about.

To The Editor of The New York Times.

Re “Unlikely Hot Spot for Traffic Accidents: New Panama Canal” (news article, July 31):

Your second major article on the performance of the newly expanded Panama Canal rightly avoided the most sensational questions about faulty construction that appeared in the first (“The New Panama Canal: A Risky Bet,” front page, June 22). Instead, it focuses on the relative merits of guiding ships through the canal by locomotives or tugs, alleged problems with training personnel, and a “fender bender” involving the Chinese container ship Xin Fei Zhou.

Over 100 loaded cargo ships have passed through the canal without incident, which puts these concerns into proper context. Much of the criticism arises from a labor dispute between workers and the Canal Authority. For operational, technical and cost reasons, the authority chose tugs over locomotives, provoking union opposition.

The incident discussed in your article may well illustrate the need to complete tugboat training as expeditiously as possible, but it does not call into question the fundamental canal design or the quality of construction. Let’s not lose sight of the contributions of people from 79 nations who, despite considerable obstacles, made the expanded canal a reality for the world economy.

JOSÉ MARÍA ORIHUELA

Madrid

Please visit this video. It makes me proud to be Panamanian!