Panama opposition criticizes new security agreement with the United States as a covert invasion.

Political Tensions Emerge in Panama Over U.S. Military Deployment Agreement

In a significant development, opposition politicians in Panama have expressed strong criticism regarding a recent defense pact signed with the United States that facilitates the deployment of U.S. troops in the Central American nation. Following the confirmation of American military presence by President Donald Trump, local leaders have labeled the agreement as tantamount to a “camouflaged invasion.”

U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth visited Panama this week, underscoring the importance of the Panama Canal and its security in the face of what he referred to as potential Chinese influence. In his statements, Hegseth emphasized the need for collaboration between Panama and the U.S. to ensure the canal remains secure against external pressures, proclaiming that “the Panama Canal is key terrain that must be secured by Panama, with America, and not China.”

As part of this deal with the Panama Canal Authority, U.S. naval vessels will reportedly enjoy preferential passage through the vital waterway, which serves as a critical artery for global trade linking the Pacific and Atlantic Oceans. The agreement, which involves the establishment of a U.S. military presence at three former bases—Fort Sherman, Rodman Naval Base, and Howard Air Force Base—has raised alarm among opposition figures, who remember the heavy U.S. military footprint in the country prior to the withdrawal in 1999.

Ricardo Lombana, leader of the opposition Another Way Movement, publicly denounced the memorandum of understanding shortly after its announcement, characterizing it as “an invasion without firing a shot.” His remarks reflect a broader unease among Panamanians regarding foreign military presence, particularly given the historical context of U.S. interventions in the region.

While the Panamanian government insists that the current deployments do not imply the establishment of permanent military bases, opposition leaders are concerned that this marks a significant reassertion of U.S. military influence in a nation that formerly held sovereignty over such territories as mandated by the 1977 Torrijos-Carter Treaties. Additionally, the legacy of U.S. military actions in Panama, notably the controversial 1989 invasion known as “Operation Just Cause,” continues to evoke strong feelings among citizens, particularly given accusations of civilian casualties during that operation.

The agreement has drawn international attention, with entities like Transparency International urging the government to clarify the full extent and implications of its arrangements with the U.S. Meanwhile, China has criticized the pact, emphasizing its perspective that the Panama Canal should be regarded as a neutral international passageway.

As Panama navigates these tumultuous political waters, the implications of U.S. military involvement in the region continue to be a pressing issue, highlighting the delicate balance of sovereignty, security, and international relations in a globally significant maritime zone.

#PoliticsNews #MiddleEastNews