Costa Rica's newspaper El País wrote last Friday that Panama's pseudo-AG Guiseppe Bonissi confirmed that a criminal complaint has been filed against the paper, for "damaging the prestige of the neutrality of the Canal". This obviously will lead to nothing but great embarrassment for Martinelli, Bonissi, Papadimitriu and whomever else has been beating the drum on how they would crush these nasty Costa Rican journslists, or anarchists, or Panamanian communists (their story changed every day). After all, it is a bit hard to wrap one's head around the concept of "neutrality" having "prestige". Besides, Martinelli, in his trademark gross and vulgar way, has already managed to lower the temperature of Panama's relations with Costa Rica's attorney general by making wild, bizarre and false accusations about the man's visits to Panama.
Meanwhile, Carlos Salazar of El País repeated his statement that the Israeli secret service is managing the security of the Canal. The initial response by Martinelli et al was that this was false, and endangered the Canal's security as the statement would attract or even invite acts of jihadi terrorism. However, it now seems that this is not the legal complaint Martinelli has made (it's now held that the prestige of the neutrality is somehow defamed, after all), which could of course be because the theory is so far-flung that no serious person believed it. Al Qaeda attacking, based on a rumor from Costa Rica? Seriously?
The other reason this theory is no longer at the heart of the complaint could of course be that it is actually true, i.e. that Israel is indeed carrying some sort of responsibility for the security of the Panama Canal.
Which begs the question: Would that be a bad thing?
If recent history has proven us anything, it would be that Israel knows how to stop a cruise ship with jihadi Hamas sympathizers going places it shouldn't be going. In terms of securing the Canal - which most military experts agree is indefensible - against attacks, this would be an asset. Israel has this capability without ever having participated in the wacky PANAMAX naval exercises, a yearly multinational event led by SOUTHCOM that is really just a glorified weapons trade show. Out of necessity, Israel knows how to secure things, be it the planes of its airline (try organizing and executing a 9/11 style attack in Tel Aviv...), its coastline, a building - or, maybe, a canal. So why would it be such an issue to actually say that? Why do Martinelli and his gang blow all their fuses when someone says something about Israel and the Canal, after the Panamanians themselves showed off their Israeli instructors teaching the police how to hold a gun?
Could it be, maybe, that there is something rotten with the security of the Canal?