TRANSITION : Panama Not So Sure It Wants U.S. Out : As date for turning over canal approaches, nation realizes thousands of jobs are at stake.

The cry of protest in Latin America has traditionally been, “Yankees, go home!” In Panama these days, it’s, “Yankees, please stay!”

As the date approaches for the withdrawal of 10,000 American troops and the closing of U.S. military bases as part of the 1977 Panama Canal Treaties, Panamanians are getting cold feet.

Nationalist fervor that once demanded an end to American dominance is being replaced by economic reality. Panama stands to lose, at least in the short term, thousands of jobs and hundreds of millions of dollars with the departure of the U.S. Southern Command under the accords signed by then-President Jimmy Carter and former Panamanian strongman Gen. Omar Torrijos.

The treaties also give Panama full control of its valuable canal in the year 2000.

What worries many Panamanians--as well as citizens and officials in the United States and elsewhere--is that Panama’s plans for the canal and its properties remain unclear.

In a recent survey published by the newspaper La Prensa, more than 70% of Panamanians questioned supported having American troops remain. “People feel like, if the Americans go, the dollar goes,” opposition legislator Balbina Herrera said. Panamanians want their independence, she said, but fear losing a major source of jobs, opportunity and income in these times of economic crisis.

Panama has had an ambivalent relationship with the American military ever since troops were first stationed here in 1904, ostensibly to protect the strategic canal that connects the Pacific and Atlantic oceans.

The December, 1989, American invasion was welcomed by many Panamanians who applauded getting rid of Gen. Manuel A. Noriega, but it was decried by others who felt the country’s sovereignty was trampled at the expense of hundreds of lives.

The government of President Guillermo Endara, installed during the invasion by U.S. officers, had to turn again to U.S. forces a year later when a police chief threatened to revolt.

The closing of American bases will put at least 6,000 Panamanians out of work and cost $400 million annually, officials here say. A group of Panamanian legislators demanding the treaties be renegotiated has put the loss at about twice that.

The first contingent of American troops is scheduled to withdraw one year from now, 40% will be gone by the end of 1995 and the rest will leave gradually until the end of 1999. As they pull out, military bases and other U.S. government property will be turned over to Panamanian control.

The way Panama handles the property--valued by some estimates at $30 billion and encompassing nearly 130,000 prime acres--is seen by many as a test of Panama’s ability to manage the canal.

It is a test, in the view of some, that Panama is failing so far: Much of the property that has already reverted is neglected, abandoned or falling into disrepair.

The Panama Canal train network, turned over to local control in 1979, no longer functions; rusted cars lie scattered along overgrown tracks in what was once a part of the U.S. Canal Zone. Barracks sitting on lush green knolls overlooking the Panama Bay are still pockmarked from fighting during the invasion and have remained empty for years.

While the canal itself has continued to run smoothly as Panamanians gradually assume its administration, officials here concede they have moved too slowly in setting up the mechanisms for taking over the land, buildings and other assets.

It took months of political jockeying, for example, to name the board that will run the Regional Interoceanic Authority, which will oversee development of the properties. The board is now selecting international consultants to devise a master plan for the project, which includes making Ft. Amador into a resort.

Carlos Mendoza, a newspaper publisher and attorney, heads the board. He recently toured California and other parts of the United States to examine how military bases are being closed and reincorporated into civilian communities.

“It is absolutely essential that we demonstrate we are able to handle (the properties) in a highly professional, very honest and very efficient manner,” Mendoza said. “If we succeed, we allay the fears of the world regarding our ability to administer the canal. . . . We simply cannot afford to fail.”

He added it was “highly unrealistic” to think the United States might not proceed with its withdrawal and closing of bases. “The fact is,” he said, “the U.S. military wants to close down faster than we can absorb.”