THE EXECUTION OF A LOW-TIER DRUG DEALER TESTS THE TIES THAT CROSS THE RIO
GRANDE

Under their breaths, Mexican leaders are voicing doubts about three
American players in the flap over the execution of Javier Suarez.

Three names have taken on a dubious flavor in the dispute, those of Rick
Perry, Tony Garza and George W. Bush.

Suarez, a native of Piedras Negras who was put to death earlier this month
in Huntsville, was, as one Mexican official says, no Nicola Sacco or
Bartolomeo Vanzetti. He apparently was a small-time drug dealer who, by his
own confession, shot and killed a Dallas undercover officer.

Other than members of his family, almost nobody on either side of the Rio
Grande is feeling much remorse over his unwieldy, untimely and
controversial demise.

But in Mexican eyes, at least, there's more to it than that.

To begin with, 85 percent of Mexico's people are Catholic, and Pope John
Paul II is opposed to the death penalty. Mexican President Vicente Fox
draws his support from several bases, one of them the church.

While Fox is the most popular president in memory, he does not command a
majority in the Mexican Congress. Rival parties have united to block and
frustrate him and, thus far, have won nearly every round of legislative
tiffs. Earlier this year, the congress exercised its prerogative " for the
first time ever " to publicly deny Fox permission to leave the country. He
had planned to visit the United States.

Before Fox was elected in July 2000, Mexican soldiers and police sometimes
tortured and executed rebels, but capital punishment was not on civil
statute books (and still isn't) and the country hasn't legally executed
anybody for decades.

Texas may have every right to execute criminals, even Mexican citizens such
as Suarez, but if it's going to do so, most Mexicans feel, it should
proceed in a manner that is observant of human rights.

Mexican congressmen (members of the opposition, to be sure) made hay out of
a claim that Texas authorities denied Suarez his Vienna agreement right to
timely consultations with consular representatives who might have aided in
his defense.

Once that issue was raised, Fox had little choice but to ask American
officials to delay the Suarez execution so that consular officers could
intervene. It is a part of his job, after all, to defend the rights of
Mexicans who live abroad.

The congressional opposition's campaign to picture Fox as a toady of
American interests (a campaign months older than the Suarez controversy) is
of special significance to Fox, and not a few American interests at the moment.

In his annual state of the union message today, Fox will ask the Congress
to approve measures that would allow foreign investment in Mexico's
electric power and natural gas and refining industries, which for
generations have been a nearly sacred monopoly of the Mexican government.

Last week, when Robert Madrazo, leader of the opposition Partido
Revolucionario Institucional, or PRI, announced that he is willing to
negotiate energy-reform proposals, it began to look to many like the Fox
proposals stand a chance. This marks a sea of change in relations between
Fox and PRI, which holds the lion's share of votes in the Mexican Senate.

But Madrazo and spokesmen for other opposition parties are not going to
make any pact with a vendepatria, someone known for selling out his
country's interest.

Fox had to stand up for "overseas" Mexicans in order to ask the Mexican
Congress to accede to American interests on energy issues. In plain
language, he had to demonstrate that he is not a south-of-the-border Uncle
Tom, that he can and will challenge the United States. The Suarez case was
something of a screen test.

But there's more to it than that, too.

U.S. leaders, far from having conspired with Fox to script his role as
Mexico's defender, forced him into it. It's a role that both by ideology
and disposition, Fox is reluctant to play. It called for him to ask Texas
Gov. Rick Perry to postpone the execution for a mere 30 days, until after
his planned trip to Texas.

When Perry wouldn't budge, the role called for Fox to appeal to Secretary
of State Colin Powell and President Bush, as well. Neither one came
through, and with a carelessly composed letter explaining his refusal,
Perry inflamed the situation even more.

Mexican officials think Perry misread Fox and his willingness to stand up
to Bush. "We believe that Perry and his people thought we were bluffing," a
Mexican official told the Express-News.

Perry's refusal was not entirely without precedent, nor was his explanation
the most irritating that Mexican officials have received on the issue of
the international rights of Mexican citizens.

Mexican diplomats say that in a dispute over a prior execution, then-Texas
Secretary of State Tony Garza (now Bush's designated new ambassador to
Mexico, awaiting Senate confirmation in September) stated in a note to
Mexico that Texas is not a signatory of the Vienna agreement, implying that
the complaints of Mexican diplomats were, therefore, beside the point.

The United States, of course, is a signatory to the Vienna accords.

"We thought, 'What is this? Some kind of Republic of Texas stunt?'" a
senior Mexican official told the Express-News.

The upshot of all the trouble over Javier Suarez and the death penalty is
that high-level Mexican leaders now look upon Bush, who proclaims himself a
"friend" of Fox, as a bit of a hypocrite. They also wonder whether Garza,
as ambassador, will be able to perform as successfully as outgoing
Ambassador Jeffery Davidow or his equally successful predecessor James Jones.

But neither Bush nor Garza has lost as much standing as Perry, who is now
viewed as a simple troglodyte.

If Perry's standing in Mexico was accurately reflected when he spoke to
Mexican reporters during the Pan American Games conference last week, he
didn't win Mexican votes for holding the event in San Antonio. The press
was hostile, out to avenge the Suarez execution.

And when Perry tried to schedule a meeting with Fox, he was told El
Presidente was otherwise engaged.

Mexican diplomats told the Express-News, even before Perry left Austin,
that they wouldn't have time to meet with him " and didn't want to,
either. They are still dismayed by his refusal to help when they needed him.

"We were only asking for 30 days, to get this trip over with, and if only
as a courtesy to the president, why couldn't he grant the postponement?" a
ranking Mexican diplomat asked me in Mexico City last week.

When diplomats ask journalists to explain things, the World As It Is
Supposed To Be has been turned on its head.

A part of the World As It Is Supposed To Be is that Texas, being a neighbor
to Mexico " and its "new neighbor" at that " is supposed to behave in a
neighborly fashion.

Apparently, Bush, Perry and Garza have yet to learn that a part of
neighborliness is a predisposition to cooperate " and respect for the
people next door.