Introduction
The country of Panama is of significance since it links Central American with South America. Perhaps of even more strategic importance is the fact that it links two oceans- Atlantic and Pacific and could rightly be considered to be the gateway to Central America.
The Panama Canal, now under the process of reconstruction and modernization at a modest outlay of around $5.3B. forms the core of economic renaissance in this part of Central and South America.
History
Its history is long and chequered, moving from one dictatorship to another, with democratic systems not able to be enforced, even with a strong ally like the USA. This has been mainly because Panama may not really be a country having a national identity, that could possibly bind its population together and provide a strong, coherent and powerful leadership sans dictatorship. The plethora of racial and ethnic mix in its population has even termed Panama as potpourri of cultures, each trying to exert political influence over the administration of country.It is established that the US had established de facto suzerainty over Panama, since the military junta needed a strong ally to hold political sway, and US economic interests more than justified its continued influence over the political affairs of Panama and its rulers. So, till the time the Panama Canal was formally handed over to Panama in 1999, the US Administration was able to hold its influence over the Panamanian regime.
Present administration
The current President of Panama is Martin Torrijos, son of a former military leader, Omar Torrijos, the latter being largely responsible for successful negotiations with the Carter Administration to stake claim over the Canal. Mr. Torrijos (Jr.) has begun holding office since September 2004 and has promised a clean administration. However, he is faced with many problems, including the fact that Panama is infamous for crimes like the human rights violations in women and children traded for enforced prostitution and sex trafficking, money laundering, illegal drug cartels and other forms of illegitimate narcotic trade that has caused tremendous detriment to the country’s economy over the years. “It also needs to address social inequality. Elite families of European descent control most of Panama’s wealth and power, while about 40% of the populations live below the poverty line. “(Country Profile: Panama 2009).
Besides a polarized social structure could also pose problems to his government.
Ethnic constituents of population
It is seen that the Constitution of Population in Panama could be seen as follows:
It is seen that the country of Panama (Capital – Panama City) is a melting pot of different diverse cultures and people from various ethnic origins. There are around 3.4 million people residing in this country. (The World Factbook 2009).
Age structure is as follows:
- 0-14 years: 29.3% (male 501,950/female 481,750)
- 15-64 years: 63.9% (male 1,085,435/female 1,061,530)
- 65 years and over: 6.8% (male 106,934/female 122,875) (2009 est.) (The World Factbook 2009).
It is seen from the above that the Mestizos and Mulattos from the sizeable part of the Panamanian population. They form part of the White majority population who are committed to growth and development of the country, obviously with foreign partners like USA, and other European countries. They are also steadfast in rebuilding trade links through increased use of the renovated Panama Canal. However, it is seen that they are not keen upon including other ethnic groups like the Blacks, Chinese and immigrants of other Asian origins, who may be contributing to labor force of rebuilding the Panama Canal. Unless this is done, the ethnic issues in Panama cannot be solved, until the minority non-whites are also absorbed into the mainstream of the electorate and granted citizenship in line with other members of the population. Again, it is also seen that some kind of concessions in terms of descendant of naturalized Chinese, West Indian and African natives who, by dint of having worked for the Panama Canal project need to be accommodated in some way, to provide a balanced approach for the casting of votes and franchisement. It would be unwise to exclude 70% of the population who are eligible to vote, in the country from the privileges of exercising their franchise during elections, merely on the ground that they are not descendants or relatives of original Panamanian residents.
Political background
It is seen that Panama is a small country almost the size of West Virginia. The political background of Panama could be plainly separated into three phases:
- Years 1513-1821: It declares its independence from Spanish domination and joins the Confederation of newly formed South American countries of Colombia.
- Years 1821- 1903: It formally declares its independence from the domination of Columbia on 15th August, 1903.
- Years 1903 to present: While administering under the independent
Republic of Panama, it is seen that democracy could not be enforced much since in its eventful history, a number of presidents had come and gone, possibly through military coups and takeovers. The fact remains that administration in Panama, or for that matter, Central America, the price for establishing democratic practices has been violent conflicts and bloodshed; this is in sharp contrast with the Southern American provinces, where transitions have been less violent and have been generally marked with peace and harmony. The urbanized, broad-minded groups wished to create a “federal autonomy or independence” for the country, including the process of Europeanization that could possibly bring it closer to more developed countries preferably in those parts of Americas. (Walker and Arial 2000:117).
Why democracy is not sustainable in Panama
It is believed that after the 1989 American military incursions into Panama, the leaders of this country began to believe that just electing machinations would not be sufficient to help retain power, especially in the context of a changing world order. Thus their dictatorial demands from the populace could not be continued for long. Another aspect that needs to be seen in the case of Panama is that the law and order administration essentially needs foreign patronage to be effective. This overdependence has been so intense, that Panama does not have even an army of its own, it relies on foreign military might, including, that of the USA to fight its internal squabbles and political battles. Thus foreign and indigenous forces do not see eye to eye on many issues and this has resulted in large-scale polarization of administrative practices.
Lack of national identity
There have been many issues raised including that the fact why democracy has not been sustainable in Panama. One of the major causes, has been a distinct lack of national identity. It is seen that the national identity aspect needs to be seen in context of fact that although a large number of white people may have been the original inhabitants of Panama, during the building of the Panama Canal, a large number of migrant African and West Indian workers had made Panama their home. Their descendants have accepted Panamanian roots as their homes, and this continues even today, with the rebuilding of the Panama Canal which may take another six years for completion.
Thus, it is seen that the migrant black population has diluted the population ratio of Panama and has created fresh problems for the administration.
Thus, as Julie Skurski may have rightly pointed out, the fact remains that Panama may be a battleground between “competing cultural and ethnic groups to control the high ground of political discourses” and thus essentially the. (Walker and Arial 2000:115).
Polarization of the electorate
It could be said that one could envisage two kinds of Panamanians. The first type would be the highly Europeanized, urbanized intellectuals, comprising mainly of White Hispanics, who wished the country to be a focal point and center of world trade, and who were intend upon globalizing Panama. They could not condescend to include that part of racially assorted population like Chinese migrants, blacks of West Indian origin and others who did not have strong ethnic roots, into the fold, but looked westward to attach greater importance to US and other trade partners to keep them in political power through use of money and political will.
The second profile of Panama was in terms of the angst and anxieties of the mestizos, especially in the interior regions, who believed they were not included in economic benefits schemes derived from Panama Canal.
They took a rather narrow and culturally exclusive view of national identify, even to the extent of excluding non-Spanish speaking, recent black immigrants from the power to exercise their franchisee.
This polarization led to two definite groups; one the globalized sector, which believed in a broad-minded, liberal and progressive outlook for Panama, in terms of building asset resources including strong trading links with other countries, and who looked externally for support to stay in political power, including the use of foreign military forces for waging political offensives against opponents and detractors.
The second was the integral people who spoke Spanish and came from interior provinces, they viewed race and ethnicity as prime determinants for national identity and were very selective in whom to include and who was to remain outside the purview of franchisement for electing political leaderships.
Conclusion
The study of Panama’s country does reveal a deeper malaise in the social structuring and possibly, exasperated by the after-effects of damages done by successive military governments on its democratic rubric over its eventful history.
“On the one hand, the party in the 1970s championed the cause of the poor in a rigid and static society, empowering an otherwise disadvantaged lower class. On the other hand, the party’s misuses of its governmental privileges during the 1970s and 1980s, coupled with its disregard of human rights and its penchant for official corruption, have generated widespread concerns about its commitment to democracy and good governance.” (Commercial Guide to Panama).
The return to the democratic fabric needs to be sustained by unified populace demand and supported by democratic institutions not in USA but by all democracies in a free world.
References
“Commercial Guide to Panama.” Tripod. 2009. Web.
“Country Profile: Panama.” 2009. BBC News. Web.
“The World Factbook.” 2009. Central Intelligence Agency. Web.
Walker, Thomas W., and Arial C Armony. 2000. Repression, Resistance and Democratic Transition in Central America. Rowman and Littlefield. Web.
Walker, Thomas W., and Arial C Armony. 2000. Repression, Resistance and Democratic Transition in Central America. Rowman and Littlefield. Web.