Story
Invalid Date
Panama’s Earthquake Emergency Exposes the Gap Between Official Relief and Residents’ Fear
Panama declared a state of emergency after two major earthquakes damaged homes, schools and infrastructure across the country. Officials highlight a limited death toll and international aid, while residents remain stranded, displaced and anxious over continuing aftershocks.
Panama’s government has declared a state of emergency after two powerful earthquakes and more than 100 aftershocks damaged communities across the country, leaving residents caught between official assurances and the immediate fear of returning home.
The 7.7- and 6.6-magnitude earthquakes caused damage in all 10 provinces and two Indigenous territories, according to authorities. Homes, schools, healthcare facilities, roads, bridges, hotels and churches were affected, while landslides and damaged roads left some communities cut off. At least 27 people were reported injured, but officials said there were no earthquake-related deaths.
The government’s account emphasizes the scale of the response and the apparent success of Panama’s building regulations. Carlos Valdés, head of seismology at Mexico’s National Autonomous University, said the country may have avoided widespread fatalities because of its “strict building codes,” particularly in the capital.1 The United States said it was mobilizing search-and-rescue expertise and aerial assessments, while pledging $5 million in humanitarian assistance. Secretary of State Marco Rubio wrote that Washington was “closely monitoring reports” and rapidly mobilizing resources at Panama’s request.
2
The view from affected communities is more immediate and less reassuring. A conservative account framed the crisis through the image of “unnerved Panamanians” sleeping in the streets as aftershocks continued.3 In La Villa de Los Santos, residents reportedly spent the night outdoors amid uncertainty over whether damaged homes were safe. Tony Jiménez, whose house partially collapsed, said: “It was a terrible thing. I can tell you with absolute certainty that in my 90 years, I had never experienced anything like it.”1
Both perspectives point to a country spared a far greater catastrophe, but they diverge on what that means. For officials, the limited death toll validates preparedness and enables a coordinated relief effort. For displaced residents, the continuing aftershocks, structural damage and lack of access to some communities make the emergency an unresolved crisis rather than averted disaster.