Navigating a Hegemonic Vacuum: Panama’s Diplomacy between U.S.–China Rivalry and Japan’s Public-Goods Approach
This study explores Panama’s diplomacy under a hegemonic vacuum shaped by declining U.S. engagement and China’s rise, while assessing Japan’s public-goods approach as a stabilizing alternative. Omar Torrijos-era multilateralism laid the foundation for adaptive strategies, framing canal restitution a...
محفوظ في:
| الحاوية / القاعدة: | URI:https://journals.openedition.org/ideas, |
|---|---|
| المؤلف الرئيسي: | |
| التنسيق: | Article ou chapitre numérique |
| اللغة: | Anglais |
| منشور في: |
IdeAs
2026
|
| الموضوعات: | |
| الوصول للمادة أونلاين: | Accès Université d'Orléans et IFPM Accès Université d'Orléans et IFPM |
| الملخص: | This study explores Panama’s diplomacy under a hegemonic vacuum shaped by declining U.S. engagement and China’s rise, while assessing Japan’s public-goods approach as a stabilizing alternative. Omar Torrijos-era multilateralism laid the foundation for adaptive strategies, framing canal restitution as a universal cause and reconciling ideals with pragmatic constraints. The 1980s debt crisis and the failed Second Canal Project exposed institutional fragility, prompting Japan’s shift from personality-driven negotiations to institutionalized cooperation through technical assistance and human resource development. Post-invasion reconstruction in the 1990s saw U.S. nation-building, China’s initial port footholds, and Japan’s maritime training support, underscoring contrasting logics of engagement. In the 21st century, China deepened economic penetration via BRI and mining, challenging U.S. security-centric responses, while Japan sustained transparency and capacity-building through ODA despite fiscal constraints. Panama’s diplomacy now navigates three competing logics: U.S. coercive signaling, China’s strategic leverage, and Japan’s non-coercive, institution-focused model. Effective strategy requires multilateral breadth and temporal depth, enabling Panama to reconcile external pressures with domestic governance vulnerabilities and pursue long-term stability. |
|---|