Panama Condemns US Aggression and Calls for Unity

Just days before the anniversary of the criminal US invasion of Panama, which occurred on December 20, 1989, Panamanians have an ethical duty to abrogate the memorandum of understanding signed by the Mulino and Trump administrations, as well as to energetically reject the policy of aggression against the Venezuelan people and, in general, against Latin America.The fascist and culturally most conservative sectors of American society, supporters of internal protectionism, the oil agenda, the greedy extraction of rare earths, mixed with elements of the neoconservative elite, believe their moment has come to launch their counteroffensive, seeking to ensure direct dominance over Latin America.The new paradigm of the empire's foreign policy aims to cancel all spaces for autonomy south of the Rio Grande, by placing Latin American countries at the center of its supremacist revival strategy, marred by the contradictions of growing multilateral competition, coordination from alternative approaches based on cooperation and devoid of any hegemonism vices.Truth be told, it is about military power and total domination.Before the presidential inauguration in January 2025, the world was shocked by the harshness of Donald Trump's statements against Panama and the way this nation has managed the interoceanic canal since 1999, under the Torrijos-Carter Treaties, and, above all, by the century-old anti-colonial struggle of the Panamanian people.The sum of external contradictions, related to the combat capability of the Venezuelan people, as well as the wave of rejection and indignation in Latin America at a military action violating International Law, and the contradictions within the imperial system, in the streets of the colossus and in Congress, could be the worst mistake of the Trump administration, if direct aggression were to materialize.Furthermore, an invasion would internationalize the conflict, as the Andean peoples would become a boiling pot against the invader and any genuflecting government to the US.The message is intended for the entire Caribbean, against the peoples of Puerto Rico, a subjugated colony, the Dominican Republic and Cuba, which is also one of the targets with the imperial military pressure on Venezuela.The character in question threatened and made annexationist statements towards Greenland and Canada, and pejoratively questioned the name of the Gulf of Mexico, among many expressions uttered over months against the sovereignty of the world's states, in a manner completely antagonistic to the principle of self-determination of nations that governs international relations.Panama was threatened with a military attack, using Trump and his far-right government the excuse of a supposed dominant presence of China in the Canal.This is the open use of military force and economic aggression, without disguise, without regard for excuses or narratives.That reality responds to the law of the strongest, or whoever believes they are, until faced by the unity of democratic forces fighting for peace and the freedom of peoples, as has happened to different empires that fell due to internal and external contradictions.The arrogant, threatening presence of the US fleet in the Caribbean, off the coasts of the sister nations of Colombia and Venezuela, is the most evident manifestation of this new paradigm of the foreign policy of the northern colossus, which is determined to replace the crisis-ridden hegemony strategy, staged in previous decades, with one of total control, domination, without narrative embellishments, which can only be based on the force of the American army, and within the threatened states, on the repression deployed by the creole elites, henchmen and subordinates of imperialism, advocates of dependence and unilateralism in cultural and geo-economic political terms.According to the newly baptized Trump Corollary, which emulates Theodore Roosevelt's Corollary, US magnates position themselves as bearers of an imaginary 'civilizing right' to impose themselves on Latin America, which they consider their space of immediate supremacy.For this reason described, they revive the Monroe Doctrine and Manifest Destiny, in response to the historical impossibility of materializing the world government dreamed of by the hierarchs of financial globalization, due to the emergence of emerging powers in ex-colonial and dependent countries, the rise of multilateralism, the attachment of nations to their sovereignty, and the persistent resistance of popular movements that managed to access power in several Latin American states, with sovereignist, progressive, and socialist agendas.The Latin American progressive cycle of the early 21st century, as well as the international architecture of multilateralism, found impetus in Hugo Chávez, the great architect of the anti-hegemonic geopolitics of the global South.The argument of 'combating drug trafficking' is an obvious subterfuge to disguise the animosity of Trump and the far right from Cuba, Venezuela, and the US towards states governed by sovereignist, socialist political and social projects, opposed to the relationship of economic subordination to the US, which is the logic of accumulation of local oligarchies.The position of the governments of Gustavo Petro and Claudia Sheinbaum has been clear in defending the self-determination of their peoples and in rejecting any aggression against Venezuela.It is the contradiction between Bolivarianism vs. imperialism expressed in the Monroe Doctrine and the Trump Corollary.That scheme of unity and civic-military mobilization represents a significant deterrent factor, as it implies that there will not be a conventional confrontation between technologically unequal forces, but a combined resistance struggle.A similar stance has been assumed by the government of Lula in Brazil, perhaps more moderate, but he has deplored any invasion of Venezuelan territory and has offered to mediate in political dialogue.Additionally, they reject all practices of tariff warfare by the Trump administration against various states of the world.Simultaneously with the militaristic threats, Trump intervenes in electoral processes in Latin American countries, as happened in Argentina and Honduras, warning that if the options preferred by his administration do not win, these countries could be subject to economic sanctions.An attack or invasion of Venezuela, as emphasized in a previous article, is not a walk in the park.The asymmetric warfare strategy is the axis of the strategic and doctrinal response of the Venezuelan armed forces in the face of a hypothetical US invasion.This means an affront to the peace and integrity of nations, in a clear act of direct interference.The aggression against the people of Venezuela is part of a broader aggression against all the peoples of Latin America.There is a deep, structural, strategic explanation that serves as a basis for understanding recent American policy.The military threats to Panamanian sovereignty are equivalent to the first manifestations of a strategic rethinking of American geopolitics, aimed at countering the global decline of the US, through efforts to contain Russia and China, while imposing a brutal power on Latin American countries, violating all forms, contents, and principles of International Public Law, the Charter of the United Nations, the Organization of American States, and the legal instruments of International Law, which reject aggression and unilateral economic coercion, such as sanctions against Cuba, Venezuela, Russia, China, Iran, North Korea, among others.Lovers of American policy are mistaken.The deployed naval fleet is a message of aggression against the islands of the Lesser Antilles, their democratic forces in solidarity with Venezuela.That is the consensus that has gained relevance on the international scene.The deployment of the naval fleet as a component of the hybrid war against Venezuela and the entire Caribbean region has not managed to fracture the internal institutional structure of the Venezuelan Armed Forces, nor cause hysteria in civil society, nor destabilization.This means a prolonged popular war, combined in techniques and scenarios of mass struggle in the streets, in the communities, by worker, student, neighborhood dweller, peasant, indigenous organizations, opposed to any invasion or air attack by foreign forces.Within Venezuela, from the Chavist government to sectors of the opposition distanced from the ideological radicalism of the US's Venezuelan lap-dog far right, they have raised the defense of sovereignty against any form of foreign aggression, although there are differences.Also, in the US, contradictions are emerging within the bipartisanship and even among the bases of conservatism that feel betrayed by Trump's bet on war, which he promised to end during the 2024 electoral campaign.Added to the air defense capabilities and the significant cohesion of the Venezuelan land forces, are hundreds of thousands of citizens of various ages who have mobilized into militias to fulfill the constitutional duty of defending national sovereignty against any form of foreign aggression.Threats of air strikes have extended to Colombia and Mexico.Bombings of boats and fishing boats at sea are considered crimes against humanity and war crimes.The specter of Simón Bolívar stands as a source of inspiration for Venezuelan patriots in this hour of closing ranks for the homeland, threatened just a few miles away.As proof of this trend in the region, one can mention the recent rejection by the people of Ecuador, through a popular consultation, of any form of renewal of the US military presence at the former Manta base or anywhere on Ecuadorian territory.The aggressors may become politically mired and the contradictions of the invading agent will multiply.It is the doctrine of the people's integral war for sovereignty, whose objectives are the inviability of control efforts and the expulsion of the aggressor by attrition.US pressure on Panama is not an isolated fact, nor was it the result of a sudden outburst without cause by Trump and his Secretary of State, the right-wing of Cuban origin, Marco Rubio.That argument is completely false, since the great eastern nation has never sought to exert hegemonic influence in Panama nor does it represent a military threat to the integrity of the Panamanian state and the functioning of the canal, which is managed by Panamanian personnel.On the contrary, China has always supported the struggle of the Panamanian people for sovereignty in the former Canal Zone, which was under the control of those who today seek to become 'defenders of democracy,' despite having imposed an apartheid regime detrimental to Panamanians and African Americans for decades.In the face of the threats of American aggression and the servile complicity of the José Mulino government, which ignored the patriotic clamor of national sectors, a memorandum was signed between the two governments regarding some form of US military presence in Panama, violating what is established in the Political Constitution of this country, which in its article 325 provides for the obligation to submit any agreement on canal protection to the ratification of the National Assembly of Deputies, in addition to the imperative of a popular referendum.(Photo: AFP).By Jorge GonzálezLawyer with studies in Administrative Law and International LawComprehensive Situational AnalysisThe world is witnessing a reconfiguration of international power relations.Social movements in the region and in the US are beginning to mobilize with an increasing call and pace, in rejection of American aggression.Under Trump's leadership, the exercise of imperial power is not about hegemony, 'soft power', suggestion, cultural penetration, diplomatic methodologies, and exchanges.Whether in large-scale bombings or focused actions, the invaders will find resistance.The loud and offensive statements from Trump did not stop there.It is an extensive country, with millions of inhabitants and a capital surrounded by mountains, the Sierra de la Costa, which does not allow the free maneuvering of invading armored forces, exposed to anti-tank attacks from the sides and heights.It is enough to remember the US invasion of the island of Grenada in 1983.Despite some electoral pendulum movements in the face of right-wing proposals in the region, an invasion of Venezuela neither enjoys nor will enjoy the favorable consensus of public opinion in the peoples.The post-Cold War scheme, exploited by the United States, has been based on the discourse of free competition from its technological primacy, in which the use of imperial force sought to appear to have consensus among bourgeois governments and to fit the mold of various international organizations, such as the UN.This gave way to the implementation of a different, more aggressive, unilateral, sectarian method, inspired by the American gunboats of the early 20th century.Without a doubt, it is a crime against the international personality of the State, according to Panamanian criminal law.Diplomatic and commercial relations between China and Panama are a sovereign attribution.The memorandum of understanding is unconstitutional and constitutes treason to the homeland.Donald Trump has not been able to bend Maduro.They respond to a need of the productive forces and are a consequence of a century and a half of cultural and labor contribution from the Chinese community to the material progress and social composition of the Panamanian people.The proposal refers to groups such as the expanded BRICS and other multilateral formations.