How natural was Panamian separatism in Colombia?1

It's real. The problem is that even at the early 1900s, Colombia still doesn't have land communications with the Panamanian isthmus so everything goes by sea.
 
It was prexistant, but what made the movement start when it did was the fact that the Colombian Senate didn't ratified the Herran-Hay Treaty. Many in Panama believed that the building of the Canal was the only way to help the Isthmus economy. If the treaty had been approbed by the Senate, or if the President had kept his "emergency powers" and ratified it without consulting the Senate, Panamenians independentists would have no excuse to rebel, and, even if they do, the US may not support them, since it already has Colombian approbal to build the cannal.
 
It's real. The problem is that even at the early 1900s, Colombia still doesn't have land communications with the Panamanian isthmus so everything goes by sea.

Even today we don't have any major roads traversing the Darien Gap.

True, but even so, the movement could have been prevented if Colombia had send troops there (led by a loyal general) when it was clear the the Treaty wouldn't be aprobed by the Senate, and had payed the salaries of the few troops ("Batallón Colombia) already stationed there (they owned them 6 month salaries, no wonder they weren't very loyal to the central government when the rebellion began). It might also have failed if the conspiracy had been discuvered earlier.

Also, the rebelles might have failed to obtain American support, if, for example, the US President's decides that it's better to wait just a year and negotiate with the new Colombian President (who, unlike the current would have been elected by the people, and had more popular support to sign such a treaty) or if it had decided to push for an agreement with Nicaragua and build the cannal there (as some southern members of the Congress prefered)
 
Top