Force ‘Never Ruled Out’ in Panama, Baker Says

President Bush came under growing criticism in Congress on Wednesday for failing to order U.S. troops to assist a coup attempt against Panamanian leader Manuel A. Noriega, and top Administration officials responded with assurances that they have not ruled out the use of force.

Secretary of State James A. Baker III, in testimony before the Senate Finance Committee, said the United States “retains the option to use American forces” in the future, even though that action was rejected Tuesday as insurgents tried unsuccessfully to overthrow Noriega.

“That option has never been ruled out,” Baker said. “But if you’re going to risk American lives, it’s the President’s view that you do so on your own timetable. . . . You don’t do so on the basis of someone else’s plans and in response to rapidly changing circumstances.”

Helms’ Idea Opposed

Nevertheless, Administration officials strongly opposed legislation put forth by Sen. Jesse Helms (R-N.C.) that would authorize the President to use U.S. troops to topple Noriega from power in Panama.

Such an action would be justified, according to Helms’ proposal, to bring Noriega to trial in the United States, to protect the security of the Panama Canal, to rid Panama of “brutal oppression” by the Noriega regime or to restore constitutional government in that country.

Because it is not necessary for the President to obtain the approval of Congress before intervening militarily in Panama, Helms’ amendment would be purely symbolic.

Although Helms’ proposal is likely to be rejected by the Senate today, it clearly created a climate in which members of Congress felt free to castigate the President for what they viewed as his weak response to the attempted coup in Panama.

Perhaps the harshest criticism came from Rep. Dave McCurdy (D-Okla.), a leading member of the House Intelligence Committee, who characterized the President’s response as “the resurgence of the wimp factor”--a perception of weakness that has plagued Bush in the past.

McCurdy said Bush’s hesitancy to use force in Panama “makes Jimmy Carter look like a man of resolve.”

But the criticism of Bush was by no means limited to Democrats. Rep. William S. Broomfield of Michigan, ranking Republican on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said “there are a lot of members--particularly on the Republican side--who are upset about the whole affair, who feel an opportunity was missed.”

In fact, Bush’s loudest defenders were liberal Democrats, such as Sen. Alan Cranston (D-Calif.) who oppose U.S. military intervention in Latin America. “I don’t think it’s our business to use military force to remove a government we don’t like,” Cranston said.

“It would have been easy for him to have responded to the calls for U.S. troops’ unilateral participation in violent actions to throw out Noriega,” said Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Claiborne Pell (D-R.I.).

“But if he had done that, we would have reaped the bitter frustration of that exercise for many years to come as the hemisphere saw it as one more example of belligerence on the part of the United States,” he said.

Bush Remains Silent

Bush himself made no comments in public Wednesday about the coup attempt.

However, White House Press Secretary Marlin Fitzwater said the President did not act more forcefully to assist the attempted coup because he did not have enough information to judge the reliability of the rebels. He said the United States had promised no aid to coup leaders and had only minimal communication with the participants.

“Our information was sketchy; our sources were not in the insurgents,” Fitzwater said.

During the fighting Tuesday, Bush and Defense Secretary Dick Cheney met twice and talked on the telephone a number of times about options for U.S. involvement. It was decided that Bush would give verbal encouragement--on live television--to the rebels and other mutinous elements of the Panama Defense Forces but go no further.

White House officials complained that spotty information and unreliable sources led the Administration to question whether the coup would succeed. “You don’t wade into something lightly if you’re not sure of the circumstances,” said another White House official.

One knowledgeable source who sat in on a Pentagon military planning session concerning the situation in Panama on Tuesday said officials were concerned about the reliability of the rebel leader, Maj. Moises Giroldi Vega.

“He’s just not a fellow we had much faith in . . ,” the source said. “The comments I heard were: ‘This guy is kind of a screwball; he’s not our guy.’ ”

But a ranking Administration official denied that Giroldi’s participation was a factor in U.S. reluctance to back the coup. He said the Administration “doesn’t sit back here and say who does and who does not have the right to carry out a coup in Panama.”

A senior Pentagon official said the rebels were given no encouragement by the United States before embarking on their coup attempt early Tuesday morning. “And at no point . . . did these fellows ask for our help,” he said.

At the same time, the United States did nothing to prevent the coup. “We’d like to see this continue to happen,” said a Defense Department official. “We’re obviously interested in seeing the Panamanians get the bum out.”

According to senior White House and Pentagon officials, U.S. military officials in Panama learned of the prospective coup Sunday from members of the Panamanian military.

White House officials said they anticipated the sort of criticism that members of Congress unleashed against Bush, but they complained about second-guessing by “arm-chair generals.” Had the President opted to assist the rebels, they said, he would have been criticized for involving U.S. troops in the internal affairs of another nation.

Times staff writer John Broder contributed to this report.