The phrase “Too far from God,too close to America” resonates deeply in the socio-political landscape of Central America,encapsulating a historical sentiment that is prevalent among nations neighboring the United States.At the heart of this narrative lies the Panama Canal,a significant passage that has shaped not only Panama's trajectory but also the American interventionist paradigm in the region.
For many in the United States,the Panama Canal stands as a testament to American ingenuity and modernity in the 20th century.Politicians and scholars alike have heralded it as a triumphant example of how America,with its political,economic,and technical prowess,transformed a dark and dangerous jungle into a corridor of progress.However,the perspective offered by historians,like Marisa Lasso from Colombia National University,unveils undercurrents of strife that contradict the mainstream narrative of success.Lasso's book,“The Erased History: Untold Stories of the Panama Canal,” urges readers to confront the suppressed realities of forced migrations,altered landscapes,and the deep scars left on Panamanian society.She believes that the history concerning the Canal has been overshadowed by a "success narrative" that fails to recognize the human costs involved.
Historically,Panama was a vibrant space inhabited by indigenous populations until colonization began in 1501,marking the start of its subjugation under Spanish rule.After gaining independence as part of Greater Colombia in 1821,Panama’s autonomy was fleeting.The American involvement in Panama reached its zenith in 1903 when,with political maneuvering,the U.S.facilitated Panama's separation from Colombia,laying the groundwork for the construction of the canal.The treaty that followed brought with it a series of concessions that granted the U.S.control over the canal and surrounding areas in exchange for a one-off payment and subsequent annual fees.The implications of this were profound,as the Canal Zone became a quasi-colonial territory,establishing an American enclave within Panama.
Lasso notes that this division fundamentally altered the geography and social fabric of the nation.What was once a contiguous national territory transformed into a militarized zone,signifying both U.S.power and the subjugation of the Panamanian people.For local residents,the Canal Zone epitomized an unattainable dream.While children viewed it as a land of exotic beauty,adults recognized it as a space of exclusion marked by opulent amenities barred to Panamanians unless invited by residents.For instance,swimming pools,tennis courts,cinemas,and restaurants thrived within the Zone,remaining inaccessible to the majority of the local population.Moreover,a barbed-wire fence contrasted sharply with the idyllic imagery presented to tourists,protecting the privileged to swim without fear of shark attacks.
During its operational peak,the Canal Zone was home to over 60,000 residents.Yet,the construction of the canal led to the deliberate dismantling of several towns between 1913 and 1916,displacing around 40,000 individuals.These forced migrations were less about logistical needs and more about political dominion,illustrating the U.S.desire to showcase its capability in a region where European powers had previously faltered.The narrative portrayed by the Americans depicted an archetype of colonial progress—modernizing what they viewed as a primitive land—contrasting their projects with the failures of France earlier in the century.The motivations to create a ‘model’ community were couched in a determination to display control over one of nature’s most formidable obstacles.
Lasso exposes the blatant disregard for historical context during this era.
The region that the Americans deemed a ‘jungle’ had,by the 19th century,developed intricate systems of trade,a burgeoning railroad network,and densely populated towns.However,these layers of complexity were conveniently omitted by those crafting the narrative.The prevailing portrayal of indigenous populations as primitive was ingrained with colonial disdain,wherein travel guides presented a simplistic image of the natives,omitting their long histories of trade and social organization.This obsession with technological determinism highlighted the dissonance between Western ideologies and the authentic lived experiences of the people within Panama.
Histories constructed through the lens of “Western civilization” have perpetuated stereotypes and skewed perspectives that resonate even today.The tropics were often depicted as places untouched by progress,a canvas upon which Western powers painted their utopian visions.Yet,such portrayals glossed over the reality that by the late 1800s,technological advancements were already transforming the lives of panamanians.According to Lasso,the narrative of history shaped by Western civilization philosophy further entrenched divisions,suggesting a linear progression of development that favored European and American societies while relegating other civilizations to the status of passive participants in history.
This marginalization manifested in the writing of history which conveniently erased the prominent role played by Panamanians in the canal’s early desegregation.For four centuries,local mule drivers,boatmen,and other laborers had played crucial roles in the operational landscape,but with the construction of the canal,their contributions faded into obscurity.The narrative constructed omits their management and adaptations over several centuries.The denigration of this contingent stands in stark contrast to the image of American triumphalism that dominated historical discourse following the canal's inauguration.
Despite the attempts to erase this complex history,the Panamanian people emerged resolutely determined to reclaim their narrative.The struggle for sovereignty intensified,leading to pivotal negotiations in the latter half of the 20th century.In 1977,the U.S.and Panama signed new treaties to phase out American control of the canal.By December 31,1999,control was fully returned to Panama,culminating a long struggle akin to a phoenix rising from the ashes.
The various generations of Panamanians had boldly fought for their rights,seeking to regain not just the physical territory of the canal but also the dignity and respect of their national identity.The canal's management now stands as a crucial point of pride,a territory no longer under the shadow of foreign dominance but a testament to the resilience and determination of the Panamanian people.As Molino stated,“Generations of Panamanians contributed their lives for our sovereignty and dignity,and now the canal is an indispensable property belonging to our nation,free from any foreign control.”