“Speech in Tokyo, Japan” by General Manuel Antonio Noriega (12/12/1986)
📺 YouTube
🎙️Spotify
“Speech in Tokyo, Japan”
by General Manuel Antonio Noriega
December 12, 1986
The Japan-Panama Friendship Association was kind enough to extend an invitation so that I might come to talk with you on important issues of the day, issues of interest for both our countries. I am grateful for such an honor. Because I am conscious of my responsibilities as a Panamanian official and as a citizen. And this invitation gives me the opportunity to meet here such distinguished Japanese private sector leaders and very good friends with whom I share the goal of strengthening all the ties of friendship which unite the Japanese and Panamanian peoples.
Only some twenty-five years ago, Japan was a silent voice in the concert of international politics; but today, and although the Japanese may not wish it, your country has great influence in world affairs by virtue of its conduct and its example. In a certain sense, what Japan does affects the way of life of the rest of the world. All of the most important observers of the Japanese phenomenon concur in pointing out that economically, the performance and example of Japan are irresistible. The Japan of 1986 is a powerful force in international trade, in monetary and financial affairs, as well as in science and technology, thanks principally to the brilliant creativity and the hard work of the Japanese people.
It is an undeniable fact that as Japan emerges as a trans-Pacific economy, it will have to carry out an increasingly important role in the problems of international politics worldwide, since the Japanese today recognize very well that their domestic and foreign interests can coincide at times.
We Panamanians are struggling to modernize our society by eliminating vestiges of economic and social backwardness, which still affect some sectors of our population. We admire Japan’s performance and example, which are founded primarily on a solid and profound scientific, technological and humanistic education. But we try to understand Japan as it is, not as other countries wish it were. We know that, within the immense interchange of goods, ideas and capital that its labor has stimulated throughout the world, Japan has its own strong personality.
We have before us two situations which flow toward common coordinates: on the one hand, the growing role that Japan will have to exercise in world affairs; and on the other, the facts related to the strategic location of the Republic of Panama, of such vital importance for free international trade and the maintenance of peace. Therefore, the concrete interests of our two countries compel us to examine seriously and responsibly all those situations which could affect, positively or negatively, legitimate interests which serve only mutual and equitable benefits for the Japanese and the Panamanians.
Central America
Because of its possible impact on the security of inter-oceanic transit through the Panama Canal, it is imperative that we first express our serious concern about the crisis that the Central American region has endured for seven years.
What occurs in all of Central America has to be of particular interest to the Republic of Panama. The delicate political-military situation in that region may impact negatively on the development and national security goals of the Panamanian nation. For this reason, the Government of Panama, together with its Armed Forces, has decided not to allow itself to become involved directly in any confrontation between groups or States in the region. Nonetheless, this decision by Panama implies neither passivity nor lack of interest. On the contrary, Panama has decided to participate actively as a mediator and as a moderating factor, through the efforts of the Contadora Group.
As is known, the Contadora Group worked intensely for three and a half years to reach agreement on a document known as the Act of Contadora for Peace and Cooperation in Central America, which was presented to the Foreign Ministers of the region on June 7 of this year and which was the result of a sincere effort to find possible formulas of conciliation.
Unfortunately, serious differences have arisen about international military maneuvers; control and reduction of weapons; and the level of national forces. These differences have produced stagnation in the initiatives of the Contadora Group.
In his Annual Report for 1986, the Secretary General of the United Nations, Javier Pérez de Cuéllar, points out quite correctly the present situation in Central America when he states:
“The Central American crisis has deteriorated continuously because of the growing interference of conflicting ideologies and the attempts to impose unilateral solutions by use of force.”
We face, then, the undeniable fact that the political and military crisis in Central America is being prolonged and, along with it, the economic crisis of the region is growing more acute. And the insistence on a strictly military solution undermines social programs, because the more that is spent on arms, there are fewer economic resources for hospitals, schools, low-cost housing and highways.
In reality, what is happening in Central America, casting aside all literary adornments to explain it, is that the region is simply becoming an experimental battlefield for new military doctrines and concepts such as, for example, that of the “violent peace.”
Extraordinary efforts must be undertaken if we are to retain the hope that the Contadora process can still offer the best possibilities for a measure of peace in Central America. Perhaps an initial mistake in the Contadora efforts is that they had as their objective to find a single solution to all the conflicts in the region, both present and future, with emphasis on political and diplomatic measures, but without the participation of military leaders involved in those conflicts. And one of the difficulties with the peace formula of that group is due to the fact that the manner of regional conflict has not changed much since 1983.
At this time, most objective analysts have the impression that the “Central American conflict” has been reduced to a confrontation between two countries: Nicaragua and the United States of America.
We are convinced that the achievement of peace rests on the direct and fundamental responsibility of the sovereign countries of the Central American region, on the basis of mutual respect and on the political independence of each nation. We are also convinced, however, that a broader and more genuine peace will only be possible to the extent that real social progress is achieved for the peoples of Central America, the product, first of all, of a palpable social justice, but also of the development of their economic, human, and intellectual potential.
In this respect, the industrialized powers — for which the whole world is becoming a single economy — have an exceptional opportunity to contribute to and to participate in the reconstruction and strengthening of the economic and social structure of all the countries of Central America, through realistic and efficient cooperative programs, in both the public and private sectors.
Japanese-Panamanian Relations
Now I would like to turn to matters which are of more specific interest within the framework of our bilateral relations. I begin by pointing out, with great pleasure, that since the end of the seventies there has been between Panama and Japan a period characterized by cordial, friendly relations in all areas of cooperation. In the private sector, which you represent in such a distinguished manner, there has been an explosion of initiatives for the establishment of Japanese banks and firms which have chosen Panama as their center for international operations, above all for Latin America.
The Panamanian government has reiterated its sincere desire that the Japanese private sector continue to invest in Panama, and it offers all the security guarantees as well as the necessary incentives so that the Japanese private sector and its representatives can develop their activities without impediments of any kind, within the framework of Panamanian laws.
Within that broad program of cooperation, which has already had many important achievements, one which stands out is the request made for the financing of the Northern Corridor and the studies of the Southern Corridor, both projects of vital importance for the future development of Panama.
The Panama Canal
But unquestionably the most noteworthy matter in the relations between Panama and Japan today is our mutual interests with respect to the present situation and the future of the Panama Canal. These are key issues for my country and for the development of international transportation and communications.
It must be deeply satisfying for our two countries that the Tripartite Study Commission on Alternatives to the Panama Canal — which comprised Japan, the United States and Panama — has begun to work seriously and efficiently in its headquarters in Panama City. And we are sure that in the next five years this important Commission will present its conclusions and recommendations on the best alternative to the present Panama Canal.
As you will recall, the establishment of the Tripartite Commission was necessary in order to fulfill Article XII of the 1977 Panama Canal Treaty. This article grew out of the Panamanian view that the inter-oceanic Canal that bisects its territory is not to serve exclusively the interest of Panamanians or Americans, but rather that it is a major technological facility which should lend highly efficient service to the free trade of all the nations of the world, without discrimination.
True evidence of the responsibility with which Panama looks at the future of interoceanic communication is the willingness of our country to accept the undeniable fact that Japan is the country which possesses all of the qualities to participate in the studies of such a vital project for world transportation and trade. We have recognized, thereby, the legitimate interest of Japan in that project, first manifested by its pioneering leaders such as Shigeo Nagano, representing the business community, and Prime Minister Masayoshi Ohira, to whose memory I dedicate my greatest admiration and respect, and who distinguished themselves by their enormous efforts in the building of relations with Latin America and, in particular, with Panama.
The distinguished friends here present know that for historical reasons the issues involved in every aspect of our Canal are very sensitive for the Panamanian people, because the struggle to recover our full sovereignty and control over the Canal and the adjacent territory was difficult and long. Nonetheless, it has not occurred to a single Panamanian to object to the participation of Japan in the study of the alternatives to the Panama Canal. On the contrary, the Panamanian people view sympathetically the intellectual presence of Japan as one more guarantee of the high level of efficiency and objectivity to be achieved in the conclusions and final recommendations of the study.
The Tripartite Study Commission’s principal objective is to analyze the inherent problems in the future of the Canal. We Panamanians, however, are interested in and concerned about the efficiency of the locks in the present Canal for the immediate future. At the present time the Canal is administered by the Panama Canal Commission, an agency in the Government of the United States of America. It is responsible for its operation and maintenance until noon, December 31, 1999, when those responsibilities will become the exclusive concern of the Republic of Panama.
The most serious challenge faced by the locks in the Canal, for the immediate term, is that of the increase in transits of larger vessels, which can only navigate the narrowest part of the Canal, the so-called Culebra Cut, one way at a time. This serious limitation increases the waiting time for ships at the entrances to the Canal, with the consequent increase in delays and the costs that navigation companies have to assume.
With the unavoidable objective of solving this problem, a proposal has been developed for the widening of the navigation canal at Culebra Cut to allow simultaneous two-way passage by deep draft vessels. Feasibility studies indicate that the project would cost about $500 million and that it could be initiated quickly.
Panama has been insisting untiringly to the United States government that it is necessary to undertake without delay the widening of Culebra Cut for the benefit of international transportation and trade. The hoped-for results have not yet been achieved. This situation is regrettable, above all when we see that several sectors in Japan have made known their interest in contributing to the financing and execution of this work.
With the same objective of facilitating interoceanic communication in the short term, the Panamanian government is already carrying out the first phase of the enormous project called “Centro Puerto,” which consists essentially of establishing an integral transport system of 55 kilometers in length between the Atlantic and the Pacific. The system would use the facilities of the Panama Railroad between the ports of Cristobal and Balboa for the rapid, low-cost transfer of goods and containers between the two oceans.
Panama expects that the “Centro Puerto” project, which will complement the Canal and the trans-isthmian pipeline on its territory, will be operating within a few years in order to provide another alternative service for the benefit of the international community.
I have taken the liberty of opening this kind of parenthesis between the present and future of interoceanic communication through the Isthmus of Panama. You can thus appreciate in full detail the ceaseless efforts the leaders and people of Panama are making in order to deserve the confidence of the international community with respect to the efficiency and security of any better alternative to be found to the Panama Canal.
The Study Commission
As far as Panama is concerned, the work to be completed by the Study Commission on Alternatives to the Panama Canal is, then, a very important part of all the preparations that my country is making to take over responsibly, seriously and efficiently, the operation, maintenance and defense of the Panama Canal — or an alternate route — as of noon on December 31, 1999. The study is of transcendental importance for us Panamanians, because it is of such scope, content and reach that it will define in large measure the future of the Panamanian nation, as indeed the Panamanian Commissioners have pointed out.
It is important to bear in mind that the principal goal of the Study is to identify and evaluate the feasibility, from the technical, economic, ecological, social and financial perspective, of a plan to modernize the trans-isthmian transport system in Panama which can be executed as the best possible alternative to the present Panama Canal.
The best alternative, which will ultimately be identified, should allow for the maximum exploitation of Panama’s geographic advantages. The international community, governments as well as organizations, have recognized already that the Republic of Panama’s greatest natural resource is it geographic location.
Therefore, my country has every right in accordance with the norms of international law to exploit that resource for the benefit of all its citizens.
The alternative to be identified will be chosen from among the following:
1) The widening, improvement or modernization of the existing Canal by means of the construction of larger locks;
2) The construction of a sea level canal between the Atlantic and the Pacific;
3) The construction of another interoceanic transportation system on this Isthmus of Panama; this would be a non-hydraulic system such as railroads, highways, conveyor belts, ducts, etc.
At present, the Study Commission has already defined the reference terms for this Study and these were approved in the Final Report by the three participating governments. Work is underway on the administrative structure of the executive Secretariat of the Commission and on the planning of the Study, in accordance with a time-line chart with a continuous duration of five years.
On June 19, 1986, the Study Commission published the text of the “announcement for Request of Pre-qualification information.” In it the Commission requested qualifying data from international consortia composed of companies and entities of the Republic of Panama, Japan and the United States of America interested in participating equitably in the development of the detailed plan of study, the execution of the feasibility analysis and the drafting of the final report.
I understand that the submissions of nine consortia presently are being evaluated for pre-qualification in accordance with the evaluation criteria approved by the delegations of the three member countries. Furthermore, this month, precisely December 16–18, the second meeting of the Council of Commissioners will take place, at which time technical, administrative and financial matters will be addressed. The Commissioners will also select the accounting firm for the Study Commission.
As you can see, Panama clearly has an enormous interest in the efficient completion of the Study, since it is the first time that our country is participating with other powers, on an absolutely equal level, in the most serious of decisions on interoceanic transportation through the Isthmus of Panama. It is fundamental to our national interest that Panamanian professionals have an effective role in the administration, supervision and execution of the study. It is not necessary to take into consideration the origin of the funds for said Study, because it concerns a multidisciplinary undertaking of high technical and scientific quality in which Panamanians will be able to apply their creative abilities, learning at the same time from the Japanese and American colleagues.
As the second user of the Panama Canal, Japan is interested in the efficient completion of the Study, as has also been manifested in a consistent and permanent manner since the creation of the Commission in September 1985.
Conclusion
One of the dearest traditions etched in the mind and heart of every Panamanian is his vocation to help in constructing a peaceful world on a solid foundation of understanding, cooperation and solidarity among peoples and States. For this reason, we Panamanians have always intended that our Canal — or any alternative project — be a bridge to peace and a step towards progress, that is managed in an efficient and entirely neutral manner.
Our concept of the national, technical and professional role which the Armed Forces should play in modern society has convinced us that the principal function of the military is more dissuasive and defensive than repressive and offensive. Therefore, our fundamental responsibility, in these times, is to promote, encourage and protect the circumstances which will ensure the atmosphere of peace enjoyed by citizens, as well as foreigners, who live together harmoniously in the territory of the Republic of Panama.
As Commander of the Panamanian Defense Forces and as a soldier, I must express my strongest and most sincere repudiation of violence, conflict and war.
“Never again war” was the solemn call by which Pope Paul VI challenged all representatives of all nations meeting in the General Assembly of the United Nations. And that challenge is deeply rooted in our Panamanian military doctrine with the concept of “Security without war.”
Finding myself now in the heart of this great country, dedicated to the cultivation of peace, progress, work and understanding, I experience a very special emotion because I share the identical sentiment which already forms part of the Japanese national soul and which is a definitive feature of its culture. This great country has earned the respect and admiration of the community of all men because it has made peace a cult to be worshipped and identification with nature a national vocation of the highest spirituality.
Japan is a great country because it has solid traditions and convictions, it has patience, it has will power and a strong spirit like the steely mountain of the poet:
That resembles Mount Fuji. . .
That violently resists erosion
That withstands the mist.
Thank you.
Noriega, Manuel Antonio, and Peter Eisner. America’s Prisoner: The Memoirs of Manuel Noriega. Random House (NY), 1997.
