US Embassy Responds On Panama
Dear Sir, THE United States believes strongly in the principle of non-intervention in the affairs of other nations. The United States also believes in protecting its citizens, upholding its treaty obligations, promoting democracy, and bringing drug traffickers to justice.
In the immediate aftermath of our intervention in Panama, the “Stabroek News” found the U.S. military action “unjustifiable.” To respond to this, it is necessary to address three questions — is intervention by one country in another ever justified; was the United States justified in acting in this particular situation; and is ITS action likely to leave the Panamanian people better or worse off? Taken in turn: 1. The right of each sovereign state to chart its own course is the solid foundation on which our world is built. However, to argue that this right is sacrosanct is to be willing to tolerate and ultimately bear moral responsibility for the horrors of a Pol Pot, an Idi Amin, or a Michael Micombero. To act with insufficient cause is abhorrent, to not act despite overwhelming cause is equally abhorrent.
2. Manuel Noriega is a murderer and a drug trafficker who brutally usurped power, trampled the rights of his people, overturned a free and fair election, declared a state of war against the United States, killed an American serviceman and threatened further violence against the 35,000 Americans living in Panama. For more than four years the nations of the region individually, in small groups, and through the OAS, attempted to get Noriega to step down, in a manner which would have restored democracy but would also have guaranteed him a safe retirement during which he could have enjoyed his ill-gotten gains. He refused all overtures. For more than two years, the United States further attempted a full series of measures — diplomatic, political, and economic — to force him out, but these also failed. Finally, in the face of direct provocation and as a last resort, the United States chose to act, in defence of its citizens and its obligations.
3. Ten days have not passed since the U.S. action, and the situation in Panama is becoming increasingly clear — Noriega has been stripped of all power and legitimacy and is having difficulty finding anyone willing to accept him; the democratically-elected government of President Endara has taken firm control and is restoring the liberties stolen from the people by Noreiga; and the so-called Dignity Battalions, which were largely composed of thugs and criminals have mostly ended their reign of terror and looting and surrendered to the newly established police force.
Only as a last resort did the United States finally exercise its legitimate rights to intervene in Panama. History will show that the people of Panama, the nations of this hemisphere, and the cause of democracy are the better for this action.
Sincerely DENNIS K. HAYS Charge d’Affaires Embassy of the United States of America.