海角大神

Even as the United States and Cuba shook hands over reestablished diplomatic relations Monday, the United States naval base at Guant谩namo聽Bay stands out as an intractable issue in the renewed relationship well into the future.

But resolution four decades ago of another contentious issue involving an American installation in the Americas 鈥� the Panama Canal 鈥� suggests that things will almost certainly have to change. At some point, the military base聽that many see as the last vestige of a bygone era of American imperialism in the Americas will be returned to Cuban sovereignty, most experts in US relations with the hemisphere say.

鈥淚f anything, the Panama Canal was a much bigger deal than Guant谩namo聽really is, but after a lot of passionate debate and a tremendous fight in Congress, we transferred the canal back to the Panamanians,鈥� says Peter Hakim, a former president of the Inter-American Dialogue in Washington and one of the group鈥檚 experts in US-Latin American relations.

鈥淲ith Cuba, normalization is the big story and Guant谩namo聽is just part of it,鈥� adds Mr. Hakim. The military base鈥檚 return to Cuban sovereignty 鈥渨ill eventually be part of this ongoing process, although it will probably be the final step.鈥�

With the Panama Canal operating smoothly in Panamanian hands 鈥� and indeed about to be transformed by a multibillion-dollar enlargement project set to reach completion next year 鈥� it might seem hard to imagine that in the mid-1970s the issue of turning the US-built canal over to Panama tore Congress apart.

Yet as much of a nonissue as the Panama Canal transfer may be today, some regional experts say it鈥檚 important to remember that the handover didn鈥檛 happen in a day.

鈥淒on鈥檛 forget it was a 15-to-20-year process before the full turnover took place 鈥� and that鈥檚 not counting the years of debate that preceded the final decision,鈥� says Eduardo Gamarra, a professor of international relations at Florida International University in Miami and an expert in US-Latin America relations.

鈥淓specially given the political landscape in the [US] today,鈥� Dr. Gamarra adds, 鈥淚 could see resolution of Guant谩namo taking at least that long.鈥� 聽

The US took control of both the Panama Canal Zone and Guant谩namo聽Bay in Cuba in 1903, as the young but muscle-flexing global power extended its mantle over its southern neighbors. The US built a canal across the Isthmus of Panama to give shipping a shorter route between the Atlantic and Pacific, and the Guantanamo naval base was built as a coaling station for a fledgling US聽navy.

The US imposed a lease agreement for Guant谩namo聽on a nascent Cuban government following the Spanish-American War.聽To this day the US sends an annual rent check to Cuba 鈥� a check the island鈥檚 communist government refuses to cash,聽because it views the base as an illegal occupation of its territory.

By the 1970s, US control of the Panama Canal became a chief rallying cry of Latin America鈥檚 expanding anti-American movement.

Secretary of State聽Henry Kissinger advised President Ford in 1975 that the status quo on the canal would feed the region鈥檚 anti-imperialist sentiments, and that failure to reach an accord with Panama on the canal would lead to 鈥渞iots all over Latin America.鈥�

In response, advocates of keeping the canal under the Stars and Stripes argued the US had signed an accord with the new nation of Panama granting the US permanent control over the canal zone, and there was no reason to renounce that agreement.

鈥淲hat you heard from treaty opponents at the time was, 鈥榃e built it, we paid for it, it鈥檚 ours!鈥欌�� says Hakim. Some conservative opponents of a transfer cited a rising leftist tide in the region and said they feared the canal would fall into communist hands.

But, in the end, a bipartisan groundswell of officials and members of Congress sided with returning the canal to Panama, with even actor John Wayne 鈥� known for backing conservative causes 鈥� lobbying for the canal鈥檚 transfer to Panama.

Despite strong opposition to what opponents dubbed a "giveaway," an even stronger desire to remove the vestige of a colonial past won over Democrats and Republicans alike. In addition, the administration of President Jimmy Carter added a "neutrality treaty" to reassure skeptics that the canal would never fall into the hostile hands of a communist regime.聽聽

The Panama Canal treaties were finally signed by the US and Panama in 1977 鈥� and were ratified by the US Senate in 1978 by one vote over the two-thirds majority required. Final transfer of the canal to Panama occurred in 1999.

Resolution of the canal鈥檚 status had no impact on the US base at Guant谩namo,聽because the US and Cuba had severed relations,聽allowing the oldest US military installation on foreign territory to carry on.聽

Now with the renewal of relations, there is at least a bilateral dialogue for the Guant谩namo聽issue to be addressed, even if not right away. At a State Department press conference Monday, Cuban Foreign Minister Bruno Rodr铆guez聽made it clear that Guant谩namo聽will remain a top grievance with the US, while Secretary of State John Kerry waved the issue aside, insisting that for the US, it is off the table.

Yet even if history 鈥� and, in particular, the case of the Panama Canal 鈥� argue that change can come to long-observed policies, regional experts largely concur that Guant谩namo's聽status won鈥檛 change quickly.

For one thing, the intense polarization of Congress today makes the divisions that fueled the Panama Canal debate seem mild in comparison, some say. 鈥淲ith Congress as it is today, nothing is going to go forward on Cuba, certainly not Guant谩namo,鈥� says FIU鈥檚 Gamarra.

鈥淐ongress is much more unyielding than at the time of the canal debate,鈥� says Hakim. 鈥淭hat鈥檚 going to slow things down.鈥澛�

Another complicating issue is the fate of the US detention facility at Guant谩namo, where the US holds international terrorism suspects. President Obama signed an executive order on Day 2 of his administration, directing the facility to be closed within the year. But the bipartisan consensus for such a move soon eroded after uproars over where detainees should be moved and how they should be tried. The GOP takeover of the Senate in 2015 and ongoing Pentagon resistance to closure have further dimmed prospects that聽Mr. Obama can achieve that goal. 聽

The US military also uses the base to conduct counternarcotics operations in the Caribbean and to keep an eye out for human-trafficking activities, while military officials say the base serves as a key component of US disaster relief activities in the Caribbean basin.

The White House has also played a role in complicating the case for Guant谩namo鈥檚 eventual return to Cuban sovereignty by arguing that a change in Guantanamo鈥檚 status is not envisioned in Obama鈥檚 opening to Cuba. In January, shortly after Obama announced his intention to normalize relations, National Security Council spokeswoman Bernadette Meehan stated that 鈥渨e consider [Guant谩namo] important to US national security.鈥�

As if all the reasons on the US side weren鈥檛 enough, both Gamarra and Hakim say they see very little indication that the Cuban government will be willing to make the kinds of changes in political organization and economics that would reassure the US and prompt a groundswell of support for Guant谩namo鈥檚 return to Cuban sovereignty.

Some movement by the Cuban government to loosen controls on freedom of expression, end the harassment of political dissidents, and expand opportunities for Cubans to participate in the economy could start to reassure the US that Cuba is evolving. But they add that, so far, Cuba is showing few signs of making such an effort.

鈥淐learly the US has gone the extra mile at the outset in proceeding with normalization, but further big steps like returning Guant谩namo聽will hinge on the Cubans making some political and economic openings,鈥� says Hakim.

鈥淭hat鈥檚 the only way to build up the kinds of majorities you鈥檇 need in Congress to move that forward,鈥� he adds. 鈥淏ut the Cubans have proven for decades that they are very slow to make those kinds changes, and I don鈥檛 see that fundamentally changing now.鈥� 聽