Template-Type: ReDIF-Article 1.0
Author-Name: Aaron Samuel Bracho Mosquera
Author-Name-First: Aaron Samuel 
Author-Name-Last: Bracho Mosquera
Author-Email: aaron.bracho@up.ac.pa
Author-Name: Epifanio Asprilla Vásquez
Author-Name-First: Epifanio 
Author-Name-Last: Asprilla Vásquez
Author-Email: epifanio.asprillav@up.ac.pa
Author-Name: Víctor Manuel Ortiz Salazar
Author-Name-First: Víctor Manuel 
Author-Name-Last: Ortiz Salazar
Author-Email: victor.ortiz@up.ac.pa
Author-Name: Gabisel Barsallo
Author-Name-First: Gabisel 
Author-Name-Last: Barsallo
Author-Email: gabisel.barsallo-a@up.ac.pa
Title: Exclusion of panamanians from decisions regarding the canal (1903-1912)
Abstract: This paper explores the process of Panama’s exclusion from matters concerning the Canal between 1903 and 1912. The separation of Panama from Colombia led to the birth of a new nation and the subsequent signing of the Convention for the Construction of a Maritime Canal in Panama with the United States, known as the Hay–Bunau-Varilla Treaty, on November 18, 1903. The signing of this convention posed significant challenges for the leaders of the new republic, particularly regarding Panamanian participation in the construction, administration, development, and defense of the interoceanic route. The objective of the study is to analyze the actions and omissions of Panamanian authorities in the management of foreign relations, diplomatic negotiations with the United States, and territorial administration, in order to explain the mechanisms of exclusion surrounding the Canal. The methodology is qualitative in nature, based on historical documentary analysis of primary sources (treaties, governmental acts, the 1904 Constitution, diplomatic correspondence, and contemporary press) and secondary sources (historiographical research and academic studies), following the analytic-synthetic method. Several documents provide testimony of the positions and actions of the nation’s leaders, some of which were contrary to the Isthmus’s interests. The terms agreed upon in the convention were clearly unequal and self-excluding for Panama, influencing the territorial organization of the Canal Zone and the future Canal Watershed. Panamanian exclusion was determined by the legal framework of the 1903 treaty, the 1904 Constitution, and the decisions of the country’s early governments. Based on these elements, the study interprets the Panamanian case as an early configuration of differentiated sovereignty, in which the formal autonomy of the State coexisted with structural limitations on the effective exercise of authority over strategic spaces and resources.
Keywords: canal convention, transport infrastructure, Panama, United States, differentiated sovereignty
Journal: Edu - Tech Enterprise
Pages: 132
Volume: 4
Issue: 
Year: 2026
Subtitle : 
File-URL: https://ete.sciten.org/index.php/ete/article/view/132/107
File-Format: application/pdf
Handle: RePEc:cua:edutec:v:4:y:2026:i::p:132:id:132