The deployment of US military forces to Panama has sparked intense controversy as opposition leaders accuse President Donald Trump of orchestrating a "camouflaged invasion" of their country.
According to Al Jazeera, the move comes after US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth confirmed multiple agreements with Panamanian authorities to secure "the Panama Canal from Chinese influence," including the stationing of troops at three former military installations.
The controversial security pact allows US forces to occupy Fort Sherman, Rodman Naval Base, and Howard Air Force Base – facilities that had been vacant since the American military's withdrawal in 1999. Under the new arrangement, US warships and auxiliary vessels will receive priority passage through the strategic waterway, which handles 40 percent of US container traffic and 5 percent of global trade.
US Military Return Sparks Historical Concerns
Opposition leader Ricardo Lombana voiced strong criticism of the agreement. In a social media video, he challenged the government's assertion that these are not military bases.
The leader of the Another Way Movement party shared his perspective:
No matter what you want to call it, what we've read in this memo is the establishment of military bases. The firm step slogan that the government has been using in its political messaging now limps and kneels under pressure.
The deployment has revived painful memories of the 1989 US invasion, dubbed "Operation Just Cause," which resulted in significant civilian casualties and infrastructure damage while removing leader Manuel Noriega from power.
Canal Control Tensions Escalate
President Trump's recent declaration about "taking back" the Panama Canal has heightened anxieties among local citizens and officials. The statement has proven particularly controversial given the historical context of the 1977 Torrijos-Carter Treaties.
The US government's refusal to acknowledge Panama's ownership of the canal during recent defense pact negotiations has further strained diplomatic relations. This stance contradicts the spirit of previous agreements that transferred control to Panama.
Chinese officials have expressed strong opposition to the new security arrangements. They maintain their position that the Panama Canal should remain a neutral international waterway.
Transparency Demands Mount
Local civil society organizations, including Transparency International's Panama chapter, are pressing for full disclosure of the agreement's contents. Their demands reflect growing public concern about the scope and implications of the US military presence.
Defense Secretary Hegseth's three-day visit to Panama culminated in the signing of the memorandum of understanding. While Panamanian authorities insist the arrangement is temporary, opposition figures remain skeptical.
President Trump's confirmation of troop movements has only intensified the debate. His straightforward announcement to reporters that "We've moved a lot of troops to Panama" has fueled opposition concerns about sovereignty.
Where the situation stands
The controversial deployment of US forces to Panama marks a significant shift in regional military presence, with troops returning to bases evacuated over two decades ago. The move has sparked fierce opposition from Panamanian political leaders who view it as an infringement on national sovereignty.
The security pact's implementation continues amid mounting tensions between the United States, Panama, and China over control and influence of the strategic Panama Canal. As transparency demands grow and opposition voices become louder, the agreement's long-term implications for Panama's autonomy and regional geopolitics remain at the center of heated debate.
