Reflecting Latin American anger at the invasion of Panama, the Organization of American States (OAS) yesterday voted, 20 to 1, to censure the U.S. military action, and Peru suspended its cooperation with the U.S. anti-drug effort to stop cocaine production in that Andean country. The OAS vote, which was taken after a marathon overnight debate, marked the first time since the hemispheric body's founding 42 years ago that it has formally criticized the United States. Although the English version of the resolution said the members "deeply regret the military intervention in Panama," the Spanish text was harsher, saying "deeply deplore . . . . " While the OAS vote was a stinging diplomatic rebuff, the Lima government's halt to operations with U.S. drug agents in the Upper Huallaga Valley of Peru could severely set back the much publicized anti-narcotics program announced by President Bush last September. The valley is the world's largest source of coca leaf, the raw material for making cocaine, and more than half of the cocaine entering the United States originates there. Expanding the cooperative effort to attack clandestine airstrips and cocaine-processing laboratories in the valley from a U.S.-built base at Santa Lucia has been a central part of the Bush plan's "Andean initiative" to halt the flow of cocaine to this country from Peru, Colombia and Bolivia. On Thursday, Peruvian President Alan Garcia said he will not attend the drug summit with Bush and the leaders of Colombia and Bolivia tentatively planned for Feb. 15 in Cartagena, Colombia. "I cannot meet with the leader of an invading nation," Garcia said. "This is exactly what I was afraid of, that Latin Americans would resent American military intervention in a neighboring country," Rep. Charles B. Rangel (D-N.Y.), chairman of the House Select Committee on Narcotics Abuse and Control, said yesterday. "It just brings back years of antagonism toward us as the giant neighbor to the north." He was referring to deep feelings of bitterness that appear to have broken loose in Latin America because of popular perceptions there that the United States has reverted to its old practice of intervening militarily in smaller and weaker hemispheric countries. In a part of the world with bitter memories of U.S. "gunboat diplomacy," U.S. explanations that it was necessary to move against Panamanian military strongman Manuel Antonio Noriega because of his dictatorial rule and his involvement in narcotics trafficking made little headway against the feeling of Latin Americans that the United States blatantly had violated the OAS charter's strictures against intervention. Last summer foreign ministers of the 32-nation OAS, acting at the urging of the United States, adopted resolutions charging Noriega with responsibility for the crisis caused by his attempts to rig Panama's presidential elections in May. But, in the latest OAS debate, representatives even of hemispheric countries traditionally friendly to the United States used impassioned rhetoric to make clear that they regard the principle of nonintervention as taking precedence over all other aspects of hemispheric relations and that Noriega's alleged crimes did not justify ousting him by force. Twice before in the postwar era -- following the military interventions in the Dominican Republic in 1965 and in Grenada in 1983 -- the United States warded off attempts to censure it in the OAS. This time, though, appeals by U.S. Ambassador Luigi Einaudi to recognize that the United States was "acting in defense of democracy" were unavailing. The delegates rejected a resolution by Nicaragua that would have condemned the U.S. action, supporting instead a more mildly worded statement that did not mention the United States by name. They also split over the Spanish and English wording of the official texts, with delegates from English-speaking member countries refusing to accept the word "deplore" and insisting on "regret" in the English version. In its final form, the resolution reiterated that no state has a right to intervene in another "for any reason whatever," expressed "concern over the loss of life taking place in Panama" and called for "the withdrawal of the foreign troops used for the intervention." Twenty countries supported the resolution, with the United States casting the only dissenting vote. Abstaining were the four Central American countries with close ties to the United States -- Costa Rica, El Salvador, Honduras and Guatemala -- and the tiny Caribbean island state of Antigua and Barbuda. Canada has joined the OAS, but its voting membership does not begin until Jan. 1. "We are disappointed that the OAS missed an historic opportunity to get beyond its traditional narrow concern over 'nonintervention,' " the State Department said later. "The resolution is unbalanced. It does not cite the root problem -- Noriega -- and it fails to recognize the threat to Americans . . . . " In regard to Peru, U.S. officials confirmed yesterday that the Peruvians are refusing to work with a team of fewer than 20 Drug Enforcement Administration agents in the Upper Huallaga Valley. "What we have is essentially a standdown in the valley right now," a senior U.S. anti-narcotics official said. "We're waiting to see if this cools off after the Christmas holidays." He said the DEA agents, housed at a heavily fortified military barracks, will not be withdrawn although most are likely to go home for the holidays. But, he added, "if {the Peruvians} pulled off the security from the base, we'd have to pull them out." The White House insisted yesterday that the drug summit will go ahead. But given the pivotal role of Peruvian traffickers in supplying the Andean drug trade, Garcia's refusal to participate would render it meaningless in the view of most specialists and require the United States to reconsider the feasibility of national drug policy director William J. Bennett's plan to use $73.4 million in military and police aid for Peru. Despite the Peruvian reaction, U.S. officials insisted that the Panama intervention was an overall boon to the administration's war on narcotics. Justice Department spokesman David Runkel said, "Whatever temporary actions may be taken in the Andean countries . . . would be minor compared with taking Noriega out of drug trafficking and stopping Panama from being a transshipment point and a center for laundering drug profits." In the meantime, the United States is having trouble winning recognition for Guillermo Endara as the legitimate new president of Panama by getting his designated representatives seated at the OAS and the United Nations. Despite a letter from Endara naming Lawrence Chewning Fabrega as his ambassador, the OAS council allowed Noriega's representative, Jose Maria Cabrera, to represent Panama during the debate preceding yesterday's resolution. Endara's designated envoy to the United Nations, Eduardo Vallarino, has not been allowed to enter U.N. grounds in New York. And Secretary General Javier Perez de Cuellar, a Peruvian, effectively has bucked a decision on who is Panama's representative to the Security Council. At the same time, the non-aligned group of countries at the United Nations yesterday presented the Security Council with a draft resolution that "strongly deplores" the invasion. U.N. sources said it appears likely to pass the council unless it is vetoed by the United States or Britain, one of the few countries to support the U.S. action. Special correspondent Ethan Schwartz in New York contributed to this report.