U.S. CONDITIONS THREATEN MEXICO ANTI-DRUG PACKAGE

Congress Seeks Legal, Human Rights Reforms; Border Partner Say It's
Return of 'Certification'

MEXICO CITY - Mexico will tell the U.S. to keep its money, if the
U.S. Congress insists on linking a proposed anti-drug aid package to
a series of human rights and legal conditions along with whittling
down its dollar value, Mexican politicians, analysts and a top law
enforcement official said Wednesday. Both houses of Congress have
passed the package but have not agreed on a final version.

The conditions - which touch on human rights, judicial reforms and
other issues - amount to a return to "certification," a past practice
in which the U.S. unilaterally decided whether nations were doing
enough to fight drug production and trafficking, said Jose Luis
Santiago Vasconcelos, assistant attorney general for international affairs.

Mexico considered certification a violation of its sovereignty.

"Why don't we tell the Americans to use those [funds] for their own
interdiction forces or interception forces ... and stop the flow of
weapons," Mr. Santiago Vasconcelos said in a radio interview. "Rather
than giving them to Mexico, they can be used by the Americans to
reinforce their Customs service, their Border Patrol, and stop the
arms trafficking to our country."

Mr. Santiago Vasconcelos' boss, Attorney General Eduardo Medina Mora,
said in a television interview Wednesday that President Felipe
Calderon is waiting to see the final version of the aid package
before making a decision.

"The president will very carefully consider what is finally approved,
and defending the best interests of Mexico, will make the correct
decision, of that we can be sure," Mr. Medina Mora said.

The sudden change in the Mexican government's tone - after heralding
the package as an unprecedented opportunity for the two nations to
work together on a critical issue - could mark the end of the
so-called Merida Initiative, analysts said.

The $1.4 billion plan is aimed at helping Mexico obtain helicopters,
improve intelligence sharing, and reduce the smuggling of
high-powered weapons from the U.S. to Mexico. It is named after the
Mexican city where President Bush and Mr. Calderon first discussed
the deal in March 2007.

"I think one way or another, it's dead," said political commentator
Ricardo Aleman. "Mr. Vasconcelos is a very high-ranking police
official and has support from the government."

No political party will support an aid package with the U.S. if
serious strings are attached, Mr. Aleman said, especially one that
offers no cash payments at all, but rather "in-kind" support made up
mostly of used "junk" helicopters.

The last time Mexico accepted used helicopters from the U.S., it was
forced to give them back after several crashed.

Mr. Aleman said a rejection of a flawed deal with the U.S. would be
politically popular for Mr. Calderon, who is losing some support for
the bloody drug war that has taken 4,150 lives since he took office
Dec. 1, 2006. More than 450 of those slain have been police.

"Mexicans are very unyielding on this," Mr. Aleman said. "First you
reduce the amount, and then you put on conditions, so why don't you
just keep your money."

Nationalism Surfaces

Some Mexican politicians echoed those sentiments, showing the
nationalism for which the nation is famous when dealing with the U.S.
Others were taking a more wait-and-see approach.

Meanwhile, American officials held out the possibility that Congress
could backtrack on the conditions to the plan and the cuts.

White House spokesman Blair Jones said Wednesday that the
administration is pushing Congress to revert to Mr. Bush's original
proposal, which allocated $500 million for Mexico and $50 million for
Central America.

"The Merida Initiative represents a partnership with Mexico and
Central America to combat the common threats of narcotics and related
violence. This initiative reflects our shared responsibility to
address a critical security issue," Mr. Jones said.

"President Calderon and the leaders of Central America are doing
their part; it's in our own interest to help them succeed," he said.
"The legislative process is not complete and ... we continue to urge
Congress to support the president's request as originally proposed."

Mexican politicians from left to right have warned the U.S. that they
will not accept severe conditions on the package, which evolved into
a three-year deal, with $500 million for the first year. Congress has
since cut the first payment to $350 million.

Mr. Calderon's conservative National Action Party, or PAN, does not
have a majority in the Mexican Congress, and party politicians have
been nearly as vocal as the opposition in rejecting conditions.

Ruth Zavaleta, coordinator of the lower house of Congress for the
leftist Party of the Democratic Revolution, rejected the U.S. Senate
version of the aid package as interventionist.

"We are the first ones to defend the idea that Mexico needs these
reforms, along with advances in human rights," she said. "But the
United States cannot make unilateral demands."

'More Information'

Juan Francisco Rivera Bedoya, president of the public security
commission of the lower house of Congress and a member of the
Institutional Revolutionary Party, said there remains a lack of
information on just how far-reaching the U.S. conditions might be
once the Congress there has a final bill.

"It's not an outright rejection," he said Wednesday. "We want more
information."

Politically, however, conditions could be a deal-breaker, he said.

Eduardo de la Torre Jaramillo, a member of the ruling party who sits
on the lower house's defense commission, said U.S. politicians need
to understand that Mexico has done its part and does not need
additional conditions that could kill the deal.

He cited record drugs seizures, the extraditions of drug lords to the
United States and 22,000 people prosecuted for drug crimes under Mr.
Calderon, along with sweeping judicial reforms and better police training.

"My message to U.S. legislators and the U.S. government is that we
need cooperation but that we cannot change our laws in a radical way
or return to the old models of the late 1990s" when the United States
unilaterally "certified" nations in the drug fight.