European Stars and Stripes (Newspaper) - September 03, 1977, Darmstadt, Hesse                                Page 12 the stars and stripes saturday september 3, 1977 aes Reston Lance a Millstone Carter May have to shed rhe last few Days there has been he would arouse opposition and even make Sions in Africa and , tall a a Sig him to the Lite Chanee in the White House Atti enemies and this has been happening and a Savage Battle Over the Panama p a a. An o at Loftt it in the last be Days there has Beena definite change in the White House Atti tude not toward Bert Lance personally but toward the Lance  publicly his Georgia colleagues Are still sup porting him but privately and sadly they Are now conceding that he is embarrassing the president and will probably have to go. This is in itself a significant  is the sort of Guy who could stand any number of editorials shouting for his resignation but even a whisper by his Georgia friends that he was hurting Jimmy and he d be gone in the morning. They Haven t pressed the Issue yet. The want him to have a Chance to testify on the Hill when Congress returns after Laborda but soon As they put it. They la have a Little  things have brought about the change the increasing evidence not denied that Lance used the same securities to get two different Loans and did t make a full disclosure of his assets and debts to con Gress. The reaction to the Lance Case fro the country the White House has t run a poll but it reads the mail has been fairly Clear people Are saying it s the same old Washington game. One Rule for the insiders and the cronies and another for the out siders. And after All those Carter sermons More important Lance s finances have begun to reflect on Carter s judg ment. His Well publicized indiscretions Are eroding the president s authority precisely when Carter needs it most to Deal with Congress on the critical issues of Energy welfare Reform the Panama canal and a lot of other highly controversial political problems. There is another practical Point Bertrance has to consider. This controversy in t helping his banking fortunes anymore than it s helping Carter s political fortunes if he holds on to his Job in Washington he could easily lose his shirt in at Lanta but that is Lance s  s is More to the Point. He has been a bold president in his first seven months. He has t solved Many of his problems but at least he has faced unto them. At Home he has defined and called attention to the Energy crisis the Stum bling welfare system the need for tax Reform inflation unemployment pork barrel water resources projects etc., often in provocative , he has dramatized human rights violations the arms race the Middle East tragedy the racial struggle in Rhodesia and South Africa and the illegal aliens invasion from latin America. In Many ways it is a remarkable record for Short seven months even though identify ing defining and dramatizing problems Are not the same As producing effective policies to Deal with them in  is still Early and Carter was just coming to the decisive phase of Many of these questions when the Lance Case diverted him. It could t have happened under More awkward circumstances. Harry Truman had trouble with old friends in the Whitehouse like Harry Vaughan who had no Power. Franklin Roosevelt had trouble with colleagues like Henry Wallace who had Power but were no friends. President Eisenhower relied on Sherman Adams As his chief of staff in the White House but had to let him go for accepting a few per Sonal favors that in retrospect seem Trivi Al. Washington has been watching the struggle against the background of water Gate one lesson of which was in a crisis Cut your losses Don t let personal consideration damage your administration. Now after an understandable delay to give Lance a Chance to explain himself this idea seems to be moving the president s closest aides though there is yet no Clear evidence that it has moved the president. Accordingly Carter is at the first critical Point in his Young administration. It was inevitable that As he made decisions the opinions expressed in the columns and cartoons on this Page represent those of the authors and Are in no Way to be considered As representing the views of the stars and stripes or the United states government. H opposition a enemies thieves sooner than he expected. Business is Good but business Confidence As reflected in capital investment is disappointing. Some of the leaders in the Lack Community Are organizing against what they Call his  his Initia Tives in the Middle East and in China have not gone Well and he is facing hard Deci Sions in Africa and on strategic arms talks and a Savage Battle Over the Panama canal. All this and More depend largely on his capacity to retain the Trust and support of the people and Congress and not on the services of Bert Lance. His personal stand ing in the nation remains High but much depends at Home and abroad on his ability to maintain that sense of his moral authority that brought i o the White House inthe first place. There is obviously an element of personal tragedy in this and this is what has kept his Georgia aides at his Side but the idea is clearly getting through that the president will have to choose Between his Friend and his work. The guess Here is that once that is evident Lance will relieve him of the decision. C new York Rimes cajuns re varas Wuhu of tuck me to Tom Wicker to reject Panama canal treaties would be a real . Giveaway7 it s now evident if anyone Ever doubted it that deep and emotional hostility to the Giveaway of the Panama canal presents the Carter administration and the Senate with a powerful Challenge. Perhaps even More so than in the Case of the Viet Nam War the test is whether the american people governed As they Are can adapt themselves sensibly to a changing International order. The Panama Issue is not be clouded bythe patriotic need to support our boys in combat or the presumed necessity to Stop communist  rather in this instance the nation is being asked to do what Britain France Belgium Portugal and Holland have already done with vary ing degrees of reluctance give up Coloni Al outposts no longer vital to their economic or Security needs whose people Are no longer willing to accept outside domination and whose continued Subjec Tion to it would inevitably Lead to political disaster possibly to lingering and Unwin Nable guerrilla  there s Only one real question about the Panama canal treaties evolved by negotiators for the Ford and Carter administrations and scheduled to be signed by Panama and the United states in washing ton on sept of. Can the United states yield Amajor colonial holding by an orderly Politi Cal process and after negotiations pursued Over 14 years and through four administrations of both major parties the answer is not Clear because of the american treaty ratification process. Two thirds of the Senate must vote to approve the canal treaties senators Are elected by the people popular opposition to the treaties is widespread hence Sena tors who know better May be forced by their constituencies to vote against trea ties that in other governing systems would be More nearly subjects of executive decision. The arguments Carter and his Lieuten ants can make for the treaty Are ample and persuasive if heard with an open mind. The canal is no longer vital to Amer ican Commerce either for coast to coast traffic or International Trade it is now of Small military importance most major naval vessels of today and the big Oil supertanker Are too wide to use the canal and in any Case the treaties amply pro vide for the neutrality openness and Mili tary Protection of the waterway. Panama moreover passionately and understand ably aspires to control of its own territory and to a greater share of the economic benefits the canal still yields. Latin american nations without exception even those wit right Wing governments support Panama s demands. Nothing could be More advantageous to the United states among these nations or in the third world Gener ally than a peaceable transition in Panama and nothing would be More disastrous than american refusal now to ratify treaties so Long and difficult in the making. Against this compelling Case  Thurmond states the Absurdity that a canal across the Middle of Panama is United states canal adjacent to panamanian  Ronald Reagan inaccurately states that most latin american nations have depended upon the knowledge that the canal will be run impartially and efficiently by the United states which not Only ignores the support of these nations for Panama but none too subtly implies that panamanians could not run the canal impartially and , most treaty opposition seems based less on factual contentions than on vague but visceral feeling that the United states has let itself be pushed around Loo much that the canal symbolizes amen can Power and that somehow the Power itself rather than the Symbol is about to be  is to this understandable if Unin formed sentiment that treaty opponents Appeal when they speak of a  was the word employed by John s Buckley age 24, the new National chairman of Young americans for Freedom and that was the word also used by former Treasury Secretary William Simon who unlike Buckley is old enough to know better particularly since the treaties Are supported by his former colleagues. Gerald Ford and Henry  did not specifically oppose the treaties and upon studying them he no doubt will come to see that they do not give away anything either Worth having or securely held. If anything to reject the treaties now would be the real Giveaway of the possibility of a peaceful and Equi table solution to the nation s oldest an most difficult problem of hemisphere relations and of the distinct political and Diplo Matic gains Likely to be made from the new  would approving the treaties say to our allies around the world Reagan has asked about our leadership intentions our International role. Our National de sense capability it would say that the United states if not All its political Lead ers has grown up in its world View and in the uses of its Power. C new York times