The period of Panamanian history which is commonly referred to as that of the “military regime” (1968-1989) can be divided into two, and clearly distinct, phases. During the first stage (1968-1982), the military regime was engaged in trying to resolve the contradiction posed by two incompatible commitments: the commitment to pursue a national project of capitalist development on the one hand, and a commitment to support US interests on the isthmus on the other. To many observers, Panama assumed this latter commitment when it became a signatory of the Torrijos-Carter Treaties concerning the Panama Canal. The second stage (1983-89) witnessed some significant changes in this agenda, particularly the regime's abandonment, for the most part, of the project for national development, replacing it with a program to militarize the Canal route.

It should come as no surprise that Panama is experiencing difficult times in the attempt to recast its political system, long under military control (1968-1989), into a functioning democracy. The military came to power in 1968 by ousting President Arnulfo Arias from his elected office — and not for the first time: they had also deposed him on two previous occasions, in 1941 and again in 1951. Following the 1968 coup, the military regime allowed no more presidential elections until the 1980s when, presumably, it felt its position sufficiently secure. However, those elections were neither honest, open, nor democratic. In May 1984, when Arnulfo Arias won the election, he was — again — deprived of the presidency when the military altered the results of the vote. When the next presidential elections were held, in 1989, General Manuel Antonio Noriega once more cancelled the results after his efforts to falsify the voting count failed.

In November 1992, Panama held its first nationwide election since the United States invaded the country to remove General Manuel Noriega in December 1989. Many experts, applying the strictest standards, view this referendum as the first credible national election to be held in Panama in 60 years. Others dispute this verdict, citing 1960 as the most “clean” election to held in recent memory. Whatever the benchmark, the 1992 referendum was acclaimed by participants and international observers alike as one that was transparent, free, and fair. As such, the referendum marked a small, but significant, step in the institutionalization of democratic procedures under a civilian regime.

This referendum was especially important for Panama's democratic transition and, consequently, for our understanding of the democratization process in general.

Throughout most of its history, the importance of the Panama Canal — to the United States, to Panama, and to the international shipping community — was never questioned. This situation changed when the political confrontation between the United States and the Noriega regime took place in the 1980s, and most of the media began to suggest that the usefulness of the Panama Canal was on the decline and no longer of much importance to world trade. In this regard, the media seriously misrepresented the facts. Let us take a closer look at the Canal in order to gain a better perspective on the actual situation.

Prior to World War I, the volume of trade going through the Panama Canal, though a useful transportation artery, was relatively small. In fact, in 1929, its peak pre-War year, the total volume was just 30 million tons.

The historical Chagres River Basin, which serves as the basin for the Panama Canal, extends some 3,260 kilometers in length and is not only the most important river basin in Panama but also one of the most strategic river basins in the world. Its two major lakes — Gatún and Alhajuela — function as reservoirs for the water needed to operate the inter-oceanic canal as well as to supply the water requirements of both Panamá City and Colón, urban concentrations that contain more than half the country's population.

Gatún Lake was created in 1913, when the Chagres River was closed off at its Atlantic outlet, while the Alhajuela was created in 1934 by damming up the Madden River in the high, mountainous part of the country.

The old certainties of the Cold War, and the conventional attrition-type war implicit in it, have gone. In their place we now have a world of dangerous uncertainty and ambiguity in which old concepts of security are no longer relevant. The present security and future of Panama and the Panama Canal after the year 2000 is a case in point.

This article will take a look at the issue of Canal security within the context of the contemporary “new world disorder” and develop the argument for a new approach to deal with current and future challenges to Panamanian and international security interests.

The bottom line is this: the security of Panama and the Panama Canal — or any other point of strategic interest, now and for the future — will not depend so much on conventional military strategies as it will depend on international and domestic policies that provide for political stability, economic progress, and social justice.