VZCZCXYZ0000
RR RUEHWEB

DE RUEHZP #0713/01 2671844
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 241844Z SEP 09
FM AMEMBASSY PANAMA
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 3769
INFO RUEHBO/AMEMBASSY BOGOTA 0001
RUEHGT/AMEMBASSY GUATEMALA 0009
RUEHSJ/AMEMBASSY SAN JOSE 2060
RUEHSN/AMEMBASSY SAN SALVADOR 1593
RUEHTG/AMEMBASSY TEGUCIGALPA 0459
RUEHMU/AMEMBASSY MANAGUA 0664
RHMFISS/CDR USSOUTHCOM MIAMI FL
RUEAIIA/CIA WASHDC
RHMFISS/DIRJIATF SOUTH
RHEFDIA/DIA WASHDC
RHMFISS/JOINT STAFF WASHINGTON DC
RHEHAAA/NSC WASHDC
RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHDC

UNCLAS PANAMA 000713 
 
SENSITIVE 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PGOV MARR KPAO PREL PM
SUBJECT: Commentator Urges Martinelli To Cancel 'Clownish' Panamax 
Exercises 
 
¶1. (SBU) On September 18, in the middle of the annual Panamax 
exercise, leading daily La Prensa ran an op-ed by 
¶I. Roberto Eisenmann Jr. titled "An Irresponsible, Unnecessary 
Militaristic Stunt Returns."  Eisenmann has long been an 
anti-military voice in Panama.  He is one of the founders of La 
Prensa, and a major voice in the ranks of the "civilistas" (those 
who opposed the Noriega dictatorship).  The op-ed provides the 
civilistas' coherent and forceful argument for why Panama should not 
continue to endorse Panamax.  It is important to understand this 
reasoning so that we can effectively engage here on the full range 
of our bilateral security agenda. 
 
¶2. (SBU) Eisenmann's reference to a conversation with the SouthCom 
commander refers to a meeting with ADM Stavridis at the Ambassador's 
residence in February 2008.  Eisenmann encouraged Stavridis to 
cancel Panamax, as it gave "the (Panamanian) gorillas hope they 
would one day return to being a military."  At the time, Stavridis 
extended a personal invitation to Panamax, though when the U.S. 
Embassy Office for Defense Cooperation followed up on the 
invitation, Eisenmann politely declined. 
 
¶3. (U) Begin text (translated from Spanish by the Open Source 
Center): 
 
Some 30 years ago the Pentagon decided on its own that the Panama 
Canal was not militarily defensible. 
 
It was this unilateral decision by the US military, alongside the 
sacrifice that our youths made on 9 January 1964, that opened up the 
possibility of negotiations for a new treaty and that changed 
everything for the good of Panama...and of the United States. There 
was a consensus that the best defense of the canal was a Panama that 
was at peace and neutral...without enemies in the world. 
 
Then, some US military officer without a memory, alongside a lot of 
Panamanian politicians without memories or backbones, dreamed up a 
clownish militaristic stunt called Panamax to defend the 
indefensible canal militarily. 
 
Our politicians have not learned that the only thing which the 
Empire does not forgive--and rightly so--is lies and deceit but that 
it respects--also rightly so--a firm, substantiated "no" from a 
reliable opposite number. 
 
Our Constitution bans the military, so the Southern Command has 
invited to this clownish Panamax exercise (during which three 
Panamanian civilian sailors have already died) the militaries of 
Argentina, Belize, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, El 
Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras (the recent coup plotters), the 
Netherlands, Nicaragua, Peru, the Dominican Republic, Uruguay, 
Paraguay, Mexico, France (which gave its Legion of Honor award to 
Noriega), and as a cover, two countries without militaries: Costa 
Rica and Panama. Military thugs from around the world together in 
demilitarized Panama. Brilliant! 
 
This is now the seventh edition of "Panamax Allied Forces": one 
under Martinelli-Mulino-Obama, four under Martin Torrijos-W. Bush, 
and two under Mireya Moscoso-W. Bush. This time, Panamax had a land 
maneuvers phase ("Alpha") and a second phase ("Beta") that consisted 
of rigorous naval defense maneuvers. Some 6,000 men and a ton of 
military equipment arrived in the country. The central objective: 
the military defense of the canal against a terrorist attack. 
Astounding! The combined armies of 18 countries to "prevent" a 
terrorist attack by one or two or three people. So the same lie that 
¶W. Bush told to declare war on Iraq, with the tragic and disastrous 
results that we have already seen, is now being repeated in our 
neutral and demilitarized Panama. 
 
I have had conversations with commanders of the Southern Command 
(which fortunately is now stationed on US soil) and I have 
complained bitterly to them about the Panamax exercises, employing 
all of the arguments that I have noted here. And I have asked them 
to explain to me what thought process they used to dream up these 
maneuvers, which reflect a total lack of sensitivity towards our 
history, towards our demilitarized Constitution, towards our 
neutrality as a nation, and towards their own decisions about the 
indefensible nature of the canal. Most of the time their response 
was blank faces and the remark that "it was already scheduled, and 
 
I'm following orders." Only one of the commanders (a man of 
respectable intellectual depth) offered a theory: that the Southern 
Command has an ongoing mission to strengthen ties with the 
militaries in its theater of operations (Latin America) and that 
these exercises enable them to get together and do joint work that 
is always of help to them in this mission. I replied to him that I 
understood the objective, but I asked him whether it didn't strike 
him as equally effective to conduct the exercises in the port of New 
York, or Boston, or even in Florida near his center of operations, 
instead of here, where such insensitivity is even an assault on our 
Constitution...and I added that in my opinion the Panamax exercises, 
far from protecting the canal, were like an incredibly powerful 
international loudspeaker that was blaring this message: "Attention 
terrorists around the world! In case you haven't noticed, there is a 
canal here that could be destroyed by just one of your suicide 
bombers looking for all those promised virgins in the next world! 
This business of a neutral canal is just a fairy tale! All of us 
macho military guys in the Americas are here to confront you!" 
Whereupon he asked me: "Are you proposing that we go into hiding?" I 
replied to him that I was not but that attracting the enemy's 
attention and encouraging him to attack a militarily indefensible 
asset did not strike me as a good military strategy either. 
 
My most recent conversation with this commander ended with a brash 
invitation from him: "When the next Panamax is held, I invite you to 
observe the operation," as if I had never seen clownish militaristic 
stunts. How long is this going to continue? 
 
President Martinelli, Minister Mulino: This is the government of 
change! The time has come, rationally and firmly, to cancel the 
Panamax exercises next year and in subsequent years. 
 
Be bold! 
 
Stephenson