Board Thread:Questions and Answers/@comment-1515484-20160127171834/@comment-412821-20160205192351

I have limited knowledge of the Canal Zone, but I will try to give you my best guess. So please don't take this at face value.

Clearly, Reagan wouldn't have bothered to transfer the Canal Zone during his administration (he even publicly opposed the move during his presidency OTL). The Panamanians would continue to cause violence, no doubt about that. But all in all, the US likely could fend off these attacks. If war were to break out (which Panama basically has no chance of winning, sorry to say), than I suppose this could give the Americans the excuse to build up their defense over the territory (but not too sure).

In the end, you can view the Canal Zone as being the US' Hong Kong or their Falkland Islands. A future president may follow Jimmy Carter's idea of ending American imperialism and begin a new post-Cold War mentality. Or they can pull a Thatcher and defend the territory with all their strength (a la Guantanamo).

Hope this helps.