Panama

Panama has contributed three times in UN peace operations. The first time, Panama contributed voluntarily with $2,000 to UNFICYP (UNDPI 1996, 708). The second time, Panama sent military observers to UNTAG (Ibid., 712). And the third time, a $22,000 contribution to United Nations Peace Force (UNPF) (1995-1996) in Bosnia-Herzegovina (Ibid.). Besides not having defence forces, it is not possible to say which one is the top reason why Panama does not contribute troops. Lying at the crossroads of the North and South American continents and the Atlantic and Pacific oceans, Panama is of immense strategic importance (BBC 2006at, par. 1). Therefore, the combination of the politics of the Panama Canal and the 1989 USA intervention—in the context of USA interventions in the region, definitively creates an environment where interventions have a negative connotation.

Initial variables of the data collection process:

UN/UN peacekeeping policy reform
Within the United Nations, Panama also participates in the Central American Integration System (SICA), the Rio Group, the Non-Aligned Movement and the G-77 (UN-Panama 2006, par.4). Thus, Panama advocates for UN reform.

Perception of peacekeeping
In Latin America, every military intervention regardless of its nature is seen by some conservative sectors of the society as a violation of the principle of non-intervention.

Domestic political environment
In Latin America, the general debate about peace operations includes the argument that participation in peace operations is bad because it violates the principle of non-intervention, and on the other hand, others view peace operations as a necessity to save lives.

The Panama Canal is also an important part on Panamanian politics. Part of the international debate that contributed to the country’s achieving full sovereignty over the Panama Canal took place within the context of this organization (Ibid., par. 3). One of the most significant events in that regard was the meeting of the Security Council in Panama in 1973, one of the few times in which that body has met outside its Headquarters (Ibid.).

Domestic economic environment
Panama depends largely on its privileged geographical position: the economy is based on a well-developed services sector, including the Panama Canal, banking, insurance, government, the trans-Panamanian oil pipeline, and the Colón Free Zone (Thomson 2006p, par. 5).

The Panama Canal and the monetary regime anchored in the use of the US dollar as legal tender spurred the rapid development of the service economy which offset markedly unfavorable terms of trade. The unique monetary system played a significant role in the creation of an International Banking Center and the Colón Free Zone. The economic conditions provide the structure to the government to avoid having to promote among its citizens to seek employment as peacekeepers. (Ibid)

Military affairs
The armed forces were abolished. The 1972 constitution made the Fuerzas de Defensa Nacional (FDN), the National Defence Force, the guarantor of national sovereignty (EIU 2006aj, 8). In 1990, after the US invasion, the FDN was disbanded and a new force, the Fuerza Pública (public defence force), was set up (Ibid.).

In a national referendum in November 1992, voters rejected the constitutional reforms proposed by Endara, including the formal abolition of the armed forces. However, in October 1994 the Legislative Assembly endorsed a constitutional amendment that abolished the permanent armed forces. The amendment permits the temporary establishment of special police units to combat acts of external aggression and special units to protect the borders, in particular in the province of Darién neighboring Colombia. (Ibid.)

Foreign policy
Strategic links with the USA: For historical, geographical and economic reasons, Panama’s most important international relations are with the US (Ibid., 12).

Under the 1977 Torrijos-Carter treaties, sovereignty over the Canal Zone was transferred to Panama in October 1979. The Canal itself was transferred on December 31, 1999, although the US retains the right to intervene to defend its neutrality. US military installations were returned to Panama as mandated by the treaties, and by end-December 1999 the remaining troops around 1,000 at July 1999 withdrew and outstanding properties were returned. In 1995 the Balladares administration and the US began to consider retaining some form of US military presence after 1999. This led to negotiations aimed at creating a multilateral antidrug centre, which would have allowed US military personnel to stay beyond 2000, but talks broke down and the idea was abandoned in 1998. In May 1999 US antidrug operations were transferred from Panama and by July 1999, after the closure of Fort Clayton, the US withdrawal was almost complete. (Ibid., 13)

Peacekeeping is not part of Panama’s foreign policy agenda. The country's international profile again came to the fore in early November [2006] when it emerged as the successful Latin American candidate for a rotating seat on the UN Security Council, ending a three-week stalemate between Venezuela and Guatemala for the seat (EIU 2006cg, 3).

Additional variables found after the preliminary analysis:

Climate changes
No record.

Independent negotiations taken by DPKO to seek troops
No record.

Independent negotiations taken by contributor countries to engage non-contributor countries
No record.

Meetings organized by other international organizations to engage in dialogue about peacekeeping
No record.