Just two years ago, Panamanian President Laurentino Cortizo boasted about his country’s success, saying it was the result of political unity, close government-business partnerships and logistical wonders. Little did he know that by the time his term was about to end this year, all the pillars that made Panama the most successful Latin American economy of the past 30 years would be shaking.
Since Cortizo’s remarks, the Central American nation has endured social unrest, the cancelation of a US$10 billion copper mine (the country’s biggest private investment) and serious doubts about the government’s fiscal sustainability after losing its investment grade with Fitch Ratings. The country’s engineering marvel, the Panama Canal, has also been hit by a historic drought that has created a cargo bottleneck and forced emergency plans to fix a channel that handles US$270 billion a year in global trade.
This combination represents an existential crisis for Panama: The country that captivated corporations and bankers with open trade, business-friendly legislation and its dollarized economy — turning Panama City into a high-rise-packed financial center akin to Miami — requires urgent reinvention.
Illustration: Yusha
It is through this prism that the presidency of Jose Raul Mulino, who won the election on May 5 and is to take power on July 1, should be seen: Despite the vote’s largely muted international repercussions, close attention should be paid to the new government’s approach, because Panama’s geopolitical weight transcends its slender geography.
The problems that Mulino is inheriting are a microcosm of Latin America’s big challenges: political divisions, popular discontent amid corruption and a lack of quality jobs, increasing migration, fast-deteriorating public finances and the impact of climate change on business. Despite doubling the region’s average GDP per capita this century and achieving the income levels of an Eastern European country, Panama remains embroiled in the same difficulties as its neighbors.
The good news is that unlike some of his regional peers, Mulino is biased in favor of the private sector.
“We will promote a pro-investment, pro-private company government,” he told supporters during his first rally as president-elect, also pledging to build a team “with the best people” without forgetting the needy.
The bad news is that Mulino came to power through the kind of unorthodox arrangement that has all too often destabilized other Latin American countries: He owes his win to popular former Panamanian president Ricardo Martinelli, who gave up his front-runner status to seek asylum at the Nicaraguan embassy in Panama and avoid prison after losing an appeal to overturn his conviction for money laundering.
Mulino, who was Martinelli’s running mate, inherited the candidacy. He has vowed to constitute a “national unity” government after capturing just 34 percent of the vote: That is key considering the atomized unicameral assembly, where independents are the first force. He would need to cut deals to be able to pass legislation, but the lingering question continues to be how the new president plans to deal with the former one.
“Mulino must first address the issue of Ricardo Martinelli, and then ensure governance with the different political, social and civic groups of the country,” said Rita Vasquez, director of La Prensa newspaper. “Once that’s achieved, address the other important issues that his government must solve.”
The combination of a long to-do list and a brittle public mood bodes ill: One of the lessons of the past two administrations is that support can quickly evaporate in the young democracy. The 64-year-old lawyer campaigned promising to return to the super growth rates of Martinelli’s years, when the economy expanded more than 7 percent per year on average.
It is now a chimera, with Panama constrained by a growing pension crisis and the threat of additional downgrades after the surge in indebtedness following the COVID-19 pandemic.
The IMF sees the country growing just 2.5 percent this year, improving to 3 percent next year.
Others are much more pessimistic: Economists at JPMorgan Chase & Co expect a 0.5 percent expansion this year, putting the economy in a virtual recession.
However, accelerating growth would only be one of Mulino’s pressing issues. There is no easy, quick resolution to either the dispute with First Quantum Minerals Ltd over the giant shuttered mine or the drought afflicting water management for the canal.
In addition, Panama has a crucial role to play in addressing the humanitarian crisis of migrants crossing the dangerous Darien Gap connecting South America with Central America as they venture toward the US.
“All these challenges, plus the depletion of funds to meet pension spending, have Panama with its back against the wall,” JPMorgan economist Steven Palacio and his colleagues wrote in a report on Monday last week. “The problems are easily identifiable, the solutions are not clear.”
Mulino cannot afford a paint-by-numbers presidency. Panama needs to rewire its economic and political system to adapt it to a new world where supply chains and trade flows are shifting, and nearshoring and energy transition emerge as opportunities for Central America.
The country cannot just be a paradise for capital and maritime refugees anymore; it also needs to satisfy the growing societal demands of its 4.4 million people, not least for greater transparency and accountability, and it has to do so while regaining fiscal credibility.
A new government always offers the chance for a radical course correction. Mulino’s initial consensus-building, head-on strategy goes in the right direction, but for all its short-term appeal, relying on the disgraced Martinelli as the mainstay of his political support can be expected to come at a cost.
Mulino cannot govern if he is seen as the puppet of a strongman in the shadows. An electorate already angry about corruption would also become even angrier if Panama does not regain its economic momentum.
Mulino needs to solve his Martinelli problem quickly, and rally the broad-based support necessary to put Panama back on the path to prosperity.
Juan Pablo Spinetto is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering Latin American business, economic affairs and politics. He was previously Bloomberg News’ managing editor for economics and government in the region. This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.
Trying to force a partnership between Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) and Intel Corp would be a wildly complex ordeal. Already, the reported request from the Trump administration for TSMC to take a controlling stake in Intel’s US factories is facing valid questions about feasibility from all sides. Washington would likely not support a foreign company operating Intel’s domestic factories, Reuters reported — just look at how that is going over in the steel sector. Meanwhile, many in Taiwan are concerned about the company being forced to transfer its bleeding-edge tech capabilities and give up its strategic advantage. This is especially
US President Donald Trump’s second administration has gotten off to a fast start with a blizzard of initiatives focused on domestic commitments made during his campaign. His tariff-based approach to re-ordering global trade in a manner more favorable to the United States appears to be in its infancy, but the significant scale and scope are undeniable. That said, while China looms largest on the list of national security challenges, to date we have heard little from the administration, bar the 10 percent tariffs directed at China, on specific priorities vis-a-vis China. The Congressional hearings for President Trump’s cabinet have, so far,
The US Department of State has removed the phrase “we do not support Taiwan independence” in its updated Taiwan-US relations fact sheet, which instead iterates that “we expect cross-strait differences to be resolved by peaceful means, free from coercion, in a manner acceptable to the people on both sides of the Strait.” This shows a tougher stance rejecting China’s false claims of sovereignty over Taiwan. Since switching formal diplomatic recognition from the Republic of China to the People’s Republic of China in 1979, the US government has continually indicated that it “does not support Taiwan independence.” The phrase was removed in 2022
US President Donald Trump, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth have each given their thoughts on Russia’s war with Ukraine. There are a few proponents of US skepticism in Taiwan taking advantage of developments to write articles claiming that the US would arbitrarily abandon Ukraine. The reality is that when one understands Trump’s negotiating habits, one sees that he brings up all variables of a situation prior to discussion, using broad negotiations to take charge. As for his ultimate goals and the aces up his sleeve, he wants to keep things vague for
RSS