Weinberger Says China Eyes Panama

By George Gedda Associated Press Writer Tuesday, Dec. 7, 1999; 6:54 p.m. EST

WASHINGTON  Former Defense Secretary Casper Weinberger on Tuesday joined a chorus of conservatives warning that China may be preparing to assume control of the Panama Canal, a development that he said would imperil U.S. security.

It would be illogical for China to "pass up a chance to acquire a major foothold in one of the world's three major choke points  especially if it can be done with little cost or risk," Weinberger said in a statement.

He said China already has established a beachhead in Panama through a Hong Kong-based corporation, Hutchison Whampoa Ltd., which signed a lease arrangement two years ago for control of ports at both ends of the canal.

The Clinton administration has said it has found no basis for suggestions by many Republican lawmakers and others that the firm has close links to Chinese military.

Under the Panama Canal treaties, Panama will assume control over the waterway on Dec. 31 and all U.S. troops must be withdrawn at that time.

An Alabama company that tried and failed to win the contract for the ports told a congressional hearing Tuesday that the Panamanians may have tilted the bidding process in favor of Hutchison Whampoa.

Peter Romero, the top State Department aide for Latin America, said Monday it is a mistake to assume that the United States will abandon Panama once U.S. control is relinquished.

The two countries have had ongoing discussions on law enforcement and security issues and have established a good basis for cooperation  "deeper, wider cooperation in the years ahead across the whole spectrum of issues that we share," he said.

Weinberger, who was a Reagan administration defense secretary, said in his statement that the canal's importance to U.S. security cannot be overestimated.

The United States saves "millions of hours and dollars each year by having our naval vessels and supplies for all military services sail through the canal rather than around Cape Horn," he said in his statement to a conference sponsored by the conservative Center for Security Policy.

Alarmist views about the canal transfer were voiced by other participants at the forum, including former National Security Council official Norman Bailey, who said Panama's border with Colombia is vulnerable to incursions by Colombian guerrillas.

"Panama has no capacity to control it," Bailey said. "The possibilities of sabotage of the canal are enormous."

Romero dismissed that possibility Monday, contending that while Colombian guerrillas have engaged in cross-border incursions, the canal is not vulnerable because access is blocked by the "virtually impregnable" Darien area of Panama.

-- ah-so (@ .), December 08, 1999

Answers

(Gen 24:60 KJV) "And they blessed Rebekah, and said unto her, Thou art our sister, be thou the mother of thousands of millions, and let thy seed possess the gate of those which hate them."

(Gen 24:64 KJV) "And Rebekah lifted up her eyes, and when she saw Isaac, she lighted off the camel."

Could these be Isaacsons, Saacsons, Saxons?

-- Mark Hillyard (foster@inreach.com), December 08, 1999.

Good verse -- let's leave it at the level of analogy though, huh?

>"<

-- SH (squirrel@huntr.com), December 08, 1999.

"Impregnable"? History is full of countries who thought that their defense systems, armies were impregnable. That line of thinking ignores what has been shown over and over again to be false. Nothing is impregnable to an enemy who has the will to overcome. Never assume.

-- B.Clark (mrmomx6@aol.com), December 08, 1999.

During normal times, this would really bother me. However because of Y2K all bets are off.When China's pirated software fails and the world slides into depression next year, China's export based economy will collapse. China will, I think,suffer famine, civil war, and breakup into fiefdoms run by warlords.Ditto for India and possibly Russia. If it goes 10+, or "infomagic", it could even happen here!

-- Ralph Kramden (and@AwayWeGo.com), December 08, 1999.

SYSOPS ! ! !

This pro-smoking type of note MUST be deleted IMMEDIATELY.

I do not think it is good for the youth of America to see advocacy of smoking here on the board.

It's bad enought that the text is in the Bible.

"..she lighted off a camel..."

We don't HAVE to allow these scenes of smoking.

DELETE the note - Do it for the chillren.

-Greybear

-- Got Matches?

-- Greybear (greybear@home.com), December 08, 1999.

Greybear, God bless you, hon. Always thinking of the little ones...

-- Mara (MaraWayne@aol.com), December 08, 1999.

LOL...

-- R. Wright (blaklodg@hotmail.com), December 08, 1999.

What bothers me about this post is that this information has been available to our government for years. Heck! The New American magazine has been discussing this issue for at least a year. Duh?, Huh?, Wha' you say? Our tax dollars at work...

-- Sharon (sking@drought-ridden.com), December 08, 1999.

Didn't Mr. Clinton already admit (somehat inadvertantly) that he knows that China will be taking over the Canal? Thought I saw a news item about that recently...

-- Mac (sneak@lurk.hid), December 08, 1999.

He probably threw it into the WTO welcome package... like getting a toaster when you open up a new account.

-- Linda (lwmb@psln.com), December 08, 1999.

Sold out by your leadership.... >p> Perhaps it's not a good thing that China will be damaged by Y2K. Few things are more dangerous than a wounded and desperate animal.

http://www10.geocities.com/CapitolHill/6608/tidbit- 1b.html

-- TA (sea_spur@yahoo.com), December 08, 1999.

Is there a source from a major publication on the internet for this? I need it for an ultra liberal Klintoon lover who's DGI. Sorry, the Geocities site above is too much for him. He needs something like a Washington or New York Post or USA Today "Nice Nice" article to get through to him.

Thanks...Dave

-- Dave (christamike@hotmail.com), December 08, 1999.

Here Dave, let your friend peruse this info.
rainman@uh-oh.com), December 08, 1999.

Link

-- OOPS!! (rainman@uh-oh.com), December 08, 1999.

Could these be Isaacsons, Saacsons, Saxons?

-- Mark Hillyard (foster@inreach.com), December 08, 1999.

Mark...

.....Just when I start to think you may know what you're talking about, I read this!?! Is this tongue in cheek, or what? Please explain.

-- Patrick (pmchenry@gradall.com), December 08, 1999.