http://www.serbianna.com/columns/savich/099.shtml
Serbianna
March 1, 2008
Engineering Independence: Kosovo and Panama
By Carl Savich
-The similarities between the engineered
“independence” of Panama in 1903 and Kosovo in 2008
are striking and real.
In both scenarios, the US used the weapon of secession
to dismember states that were perceived as hostile to
US interests. Columbia prevented the construction of
the Panama Canal, seen as a vital geopolitical,
military, and commercial interest for the US.
The US built 14 military bases in Panama and was
reported to have had 130 installations there overall.
In Kosovo, the US constructed Camp Bondsteel, one of
the largest and most expensive US military bases ever
constructed, which houses 4,000 US occupation troops.
The camp complex was constructed on 955 acres in
Kosovo with a 7 mile perimeter.
-Serbia, similarly, was seen as an obstacle to US
efforts to bring the Balkan countries, Southeastern
Europe, into NATO and US military and commercial
alliances.
US leaders saw US penetration of the Balkans as of
vital strategic interest for the US.
US backers of Kosovo independence have stated that the
illegal secession of the Serbian province of Kosovo
was a “unique” and special case. But was the
“independence” of Kosovo sui generis and unique?
The illegal seizure and occupation of Kosovo by the US
is not unique or special.
In 1903, the US engineered the illegal secession of
Panama from Columbia. The Panamanian model was applied
to Kosovo by the US. How did Panama achieve
“independence” in 1903?
In 1904, US President Theodore Roosevelt enunciated
the Corollary to the Monroe Doctrine, which allowed
the US to intervene anywhere in the Western Hemisphere
to prevent intervention by European powers.
In 1903, the US planned to construct the Panama Canal
for strategic military and commercial reasons. Panama
was a northern province of Columbia. Colombia,
however, did not back the US plan to create a canal on
Colombian territory that the US would occupy and have
sovereignty over indefinitely.
The way the US government got around this problem was
to send US Marines to Colombia to engineer the
"independence" of the province of Panama. The US
staged a one day “revolution” that was run by the US
which resulted in a declaration of “independence”
immediately recognized by the US. The US then
installed a US-backed regime in the newly independent
nation of Panama.
The US had been planning to build the Panama Canal
after the 1898 Spanish American War as a construction
project vital to US geopolitical, military, and
commercial interests.
The plan was to construct the canal over Columbian
territory, in the northern province of Panama.
Following the Spanish American War, the US emerged as
a global colonial and imperial power, joining the
other European colonial powers or empires, Great
Britain, France, Germany, and Russia.
The US detached Cuba, the Philippines, Guam, and
Puerto Rico from Spain after “the splendid little
war”. The US annexed these Spanish territories by
military force and made them into US “possessions” or
colonies.
The proposed Panama Canal was perceived as essential
for the emergence of the US as a global imperial
power. The Canal would allow the US navy to move from
the Atlantic to the Pacific without having to traverse
around South America.
The Canal was vital from a military and strategic
perspective, as well as commercially. Two routes were
proposed, a canal through Nicaragua or Panama. The
backers of the Panama route were able to get their
plan approved. The next step was to obtain the
permission of Columbia to construct the canal over
Columbian territory, the northern province of Panama.
US Secretary of State John Hay and the Foreign
Minister of Columbia Tomas Herran signed a treaty
allowing the US to construct the canal. Columbia would
receive $10 million and yearly payments of $250,000
for the use of the land. The US Congress ratified the
Treaty on March 17, 1903. The Columbian Congress,
however, rejected the treaty unanimously on August 12,
1903. The violation of Columbian sovereignty was one
key issue for opposition to the plan.
The US had several options. The US could build a canal
at an alternative site in Nicaragua. The US could seek
to renegotiate the deal with Columbia. The US could
occupy or seize Panama based on the 1847 treaty that
the US and New Granada (the precursor to Columbia)
signed that gave the US the right of passage over
Panama.
There was another option that was more subtle and
duplicitous. This was the option the US chose. The US
could engineer the “independence” of Panama and
achieve the secession of the province by superior
force. The Indianapolis Sentinel newspaper even
cynically debated the independence option in 1903:
“The simplest plan of coercing Columbia would be
inciting a revolution in Panama…and supporting the
insurrectionary government….It is hypocritical, but it
preserves appearances.”
In May, 1903, the “independence” or detachment or
dismemberment of Panama from Columbia was being
engineered as a contingency if the canal agreement
with the U.S. was rejected by Columbia.
The secessionists were led by Manuel Amador Guerrero,
known as Dr. Amador, who was a physician who worked
for the Railroad Company, who went to New York to
coordinate the independence or secession strategy with
US corporate and government officials. He sought $6
million from the US to arm the separatists. His
discussions were with William Cromwell, who was one of
the sponsors of the Panama Canal construction project.
Philippe Bunau-Varilla, a French engineer involved in
the canal project, who was to obtain $100,000 for the
secessionists to finance the “independence”, was the
intermediary between the US government and the
Panamanian conspirators. The secessionists had links
to the Panama Railroad and the New Panama Company
which were owned by the US government.
US President Theodore Roosevelt saw the canal as of
vital interest to the U.S. He threatened the Columbia
leaders: “These contemptible little creatures in
Bogota ought to understand how much they are
jeopardizing things and imperiling their own future.”
US Ambassador to Columbia Arthur M. Beaupre similarly
threatened the Bogota government: “[O]ur U.S. Congress
would take steps in the coming winter that every
friend of Columbia would painfully regret.”
The US then chose the “independence” option.
>From August 12 to October 15, 1903, the planning with
Panamanian secessionists was coordinated. The US would
empower separatists and secessionists to seize
Panamanian territory which the US would militarily
occupy. The separatists that the US created would then
declare independence unilaterally. The US would then
recognize this independence. There would be nothing
that Columbia could do to prevent the amputation or
detachment of Panama.
On October 26th, the US sent two war ships to Panama,
the USS Nashville and the Dixie, which docked at
Colon, with 450 marines on board, prepared for war and
armed conflict with Columbia.
In the Pacific, the US war ships Marblehead and the
Boston were deployed. The objective was to prevent the
Columbian navy from preventing the takeover of Panama
by the US and its Panamanian proxies. This was an
instance of “gunboat diplomacy”.
Ironically, the Nashville had been used to put down
the Filipino insurgency or independence movement in
1900 and the Boxer Rebellion, a Chinese insurgency to
achieve independence from European colonial and
imperial occupation and exploitation.
On November 2, 1903, the Columbian naval vessel
Cartagena was deployed to Panama. The US war ship
Nashville, with eight 4-inch guns, however, was able
to force the ship to retreat. The Columbian garrison
on Panama was bribed by US forces not to intervene.
The next day Panama declared independence. The US
immediately recognized the independence of Panama. The
Panama Canal could now be built. Voila! A new nation
was born just like that.
Two weeks after independence, the newly “independent”
nation of Panama signed a treaty with the US that gave
permission for the canal project.
The US had the right to control Panamanian territory
surrounding the canal “in perpetuity”.
The U.S. gave the $10 million and the yearly payments
of $250,000 to Panama instead of Columbia. The US
trained the Panamanian armed forces and civil
administrators.
The dollar became the official currency. A flag and
constitution were even prepared.
Bunau-Varilla, although a French citizen, was made the
Panamanian Ambassador to the US. The first Panamanian
flag was designed and sewn by hand in Highland Falls,
New York, from fabric which was bought at Macy’s
Department Store. The flag was similar to the state
flag of Texas, red, white, and blue, with two stars.
In 1921 Columbia was forced to recognize the
independence of its former province. The US paid
Columbia $21 million in exchange for recognition.
Panama would be ruled by juntas, the military, and
dictatorships for much of the 20th century. In 1989,
the US would depose Panamanian dictator Manuel
Noriega, who had been a CIA asset since 1959.
The similarities between the engineered “independence”
of Panama in 1903 and Kosovo in 2008 are striking and
real.
In both scenarios, the US used the weapon of secession
to dismember states that were perceived as hostile to
US interests. Columbia prevented the construction of
the Panama Canal, seen as a vital geopolitical,
military, and commercial interest for the US.
The US built 14 military bases in Panama and was
reported to have had 130 installations there overall.
In Kosovo, the US constructed Camp Bondsteel, one of
the largest and most expensive US military bases ever
constructed, which houses 4,000 US occupation troops.
The camp complex was constructed on 955 acres in
Kosovo with a 7 mile perimeter. The base was
constructed by private firm Kellogg, Brown, and Root
(KBR) and the US Army for $350 million and costs $50
million a year to run.
The camp has its own electricity power source, water
treatment facility, waste disposal, SEA huts, a
helicopter landing port and even a Burger King
restaurant and a Taco Bell.
In November, 2005, a human rights envoy of the Council
of Europe, Alvaro Gil-Robles, went to the camp where
he saw a detention facility which he characterized as
a "smaller version of Guantanamo".
Serbia, similarly, was seen as an obstacle to US
efforts to bring the Balkan countries, Southeastern
Europe, into NATO and US military and commercial
alliances.
US leaders saw US penetration of the Balkans as of
vital strategic interest for the US.
In the 2000 Presidential debates, George W. Bush
stated that Kosovo was vital for the future of NATO
and for NATO expansion. Kosovo and the Balkans were
vital for the US military and strategic role in
Southeastern Europe.
Like in the Panama scenario, US policy was to use the
potential secessionist movements as a way to dismember
or neutralize a country that was perceived as hostile,
antagonistic, or was an obstruction.
The Kosovo scenario was, thus, not “unique” or sui
generis. Panama showed that the modus operandi (MO)
had been used earlier.
Serbian News Network - SNN
[email protected]
http://www.antic.org/
