(2 of 4)
The man around whom all the controversy swirled remained unflustered. Noriega, 49, shows no signs of being intimidated by the outcries against his rule, either from his fellow citizens or from the increasingly hostile Reagan Administration. The U.S. first began distancing itself from the Panama government after a 1984 presidential election that prompted widespread charges of ballot fraud. The process continued two years later, when a New York Times investigative report alleged that Noriega was involved in smuggling drugs and weapons, laundering money and supplying U.S. intelligence secrets to Cuba. During the past year, officials in Washington have repeatedly called for Panamanian "democracy," a diplomatic code word for Noriega's ouster. During a meeting last week with a Panamanian emissary, Assistant Secretary of State Elliott Abrams again sounded the theme, calling for a series of steps that would lead "to a fully functioning democracy."
In many ways, the story seems a familiar one: amid mounting evidence of civil abuses, excessive patronage and corruption, a U.S.-backed dictator is faced with increasing domestic unrest and demands for his resignation. Washington then steps in, urging the despised leader to go quietly into the night. The dictator battles on until defeat is unavoidable, then flees in search of asylum or, in the recent case of South Korea, finally gives in to opposition demands for reform. The basic scenario has been played out, with variations, in Iran, Nicaragua, the Philippines and Haiti. It may be a while, however, before it turns out that way in Panama. U.S. State Department officials admit with regret that Noriega stands at least an even chance of hanging on.
The general's greatest asset is his position as head of Panama's 12,000- strong Defense Force. Since he became commander in chief in 1983, Noriega has craftily surrounded himself with cronies who share a stake in his continued rule. Sullen and sarcastic, the general enjoys almost unwavering loyalty from his officers. Thus far, there is no sign that the military hierarchy is prepared to turn against him. Just as important, on the civilian side no political leader has emerged to present an obvious alternative to Noriega's rule.
Noriega also juggles several seemingly antagonistic goals. He has courted American goodwill, particularly at times when U.S.-Panamanian relations are souring. Predictably, a high-level envoy was dispatched to Washington last week to soothe bad feelings following attacks by government-sponsored mobs on the U.S. embassy in Panama City. Simultaneously, Noriega has resorted to a tactic he has used before when under attack: fanning anti-American sentiment in Panama. In response to the recent charges of criminal activity, Noriega retorted that the allegations were designed to allow the U.S. to welsh on a 1977 treaty that in the year 2000 would give Panama the important U.S.-built canal that bisects the country. He has also charged the U.S. with interference in Panamanian affairs, playing not only to leftist audiences at home but to Cuba and Nicaragua as well. Panama's ambitions to be a major player in the region require that it maintain good relations with regimes of all political stripes.