HYPOCRISY OF U.S. DRUG-WAR POLITICS DOESN'T HELP JUAN

SO, PRESIDENT Clinton wants to certify Mexico as a worthy ally in the
war against drug trafficking. Critics of Mexico say the country has
flunked and should be punished with less aid. Personally, I think this
whole argument is beside the point, especially when I see it through
the life of Juan.

That's what I'll call him. He was a young Mexican I helped convict and
send to prison a few years ago for peddling little packets of cocaine
in San Jose.

We jurors had no choice. The cops had cased him out for weeks, taking
pictures and tape-recording his drug peddling. It was an open-and-shut
case to everyone except Juan. He wouldn't accept a plea bargain.

When he put himself on the stand, he responded in Spanish over and
over, ``I didn't do it'' or ``I'm innocent.'' Even the prosecutors
looked embarrassed by Juan's naive, pathetic effort at defending himself.

I learned a little more about him after the trial. Juan had immigrated
illegally to the United States to work any job he could, just like
thousands of poor Mexicans. And like a very tiny percentage of them,
he risked everything to make a few fast bucks feeding the American
addiction to narcotics.

Looking back, Juan's story is bigger than one two-bit pusher. His
hapless denials reflect two greater, cynical denials spouting from
Washington and Mexico City. One is Mexico City's blind eye to illegal
immigration. The other is Washington's unwillingness to admit that its
home-grown drug addiction is what fuels international drug
trafficking.

The president must certify by March 1 which countries are reliable
partners in the war on drugs.

HERE are the main arguments for Mexico: It's sniffed out hundreds of
corrupt petty officials, driven marijuana and poppy growers into hiding and
has increased anti-narcotics spending by $500 million since last year.

Here's the argument against Mexico: President Zedillo hasn't brought in any
of the identified drug kingpins or purged his government of corrupt
officials, seizures of drugs have dropped significantly from last year and
Mexico won't extradite alleged criminals to the United States.

Everybody's probably more right than wrong here. The point is that the
certification process is a blatant sham.

Every year, Colombia, Afghanistan and Iran are decertified. Not
because they're meccas for drug lords, although they are. It's just
that they're easy targets for chest-pounding U.S. drug czars. Those
countries are far away and can't cause much trouble inside the United
States.

But Mexico could if problems there became worse.

Clinton is smart to certify Mexico. Better to accept a half-hearted
government of 100 million people on our southern border as an ally and
partner than to dis it like some renegade Persian Gulf tyrant.

Now that the Cold War is over, Mexico and its many problems present
the United States with its greatest foreign-policy challenges. The two
governments must deal on all problems as equals, not as a tough cop
and his snitch.

ANYWAY, here are two more reasons for certifying Mexico: First, it repaid a
$12.5 billion international bailout loan, with interest. That saved a ton
of American investments there. Second, the Mexican people endured a 20
percent slash in their standard of living and did not revolt. Now that
really would have sent illegal immigration through the roof.

If that isn't worth a few good-faith points for Mexico, what
is?

I don't know where Juan the illegal immigrant-turned-drug-dealer is
today. Maybe he's still behind bars here or in Mexico, or back on the
streets.

All I know is that the draw of easy money was so strong that the
annual hypocrisy of drug-war certification could not have stopped him
from crossing illegally and doing what he did.

Write Joe Rodriguez at the San Jose Mercury News, 750 Ridder Park
Drive, San Jose, Calif. 95190; or e-mail jrodriguez@sjmercury.com .