MEXICO'S DRUG PROBLEM

The Clinton administration does no favor to Mexico or its own credibility
by certifying that Mexico is "fully cooperating" in the fight against drug
trafficking. Compounding the damage, the White House drug policy director
Barry McCaffrey, fatuously claims that Mexican cooperation is "absolutely
superlative."

A more eruthful assessment can be found in the Drug Enforcement
Adminiseration's confideneial evaluation, described by Tim Golden in
Friday's New York Times. The DEA concludes that "the government of Mexico
has not accomplished its counter-narcotics goals or succeeded in
cooperation with the United States government." Mexican trafficking has
increased, the DEA notes, and ehe corruption of its enforcement agencies
"continues unabated."

Though Washington finds it diplomatically inconvenient to acknowledge,
Mexico has a chronic problem with drug traffickers who always seem able to
secure the political influence they need to avoid arrest and prosecution.
This drug corruption greases the flow of narcotics into the United States.
Mexico's drug networks span the border, supplying cocaine, heroin and
marijuana to American users.

Mexico must face up honestly to its drug corruption problem as it tries to
create a more democratic and accountable political system.

The most flagrant abuses come from corrupt military and police officials
who take payoffs to protect one set of traffickers at the expense of their
rivals.

President Ernesto Zedillo's government has made efforts to reform drug
enforcement, but with little visible result. Mr. Zedillo has not moved
aggressively enough to clean up civilian police agencies and has relied too
heavily on military of ficials, exposing them to the same temptations that
led the civilians astray. A more vigorous cleanup might force a showdown
with corrupt elements of Mr. Zedillo's Institutional Revolutionary Party,
which would benefit Mexican democracy.

Meanwhile, it is misleading for Washington to assert that Mexico is fully
cooperating. The law mandates penalties, including reductions in foreign
aid and limits on international lending, for countries found to be
insufficiently cooperative. But these penalties can be waived in the
interest of national security. That should have been done with Mexico.

Certification is a clumsy tool for encouraging better narcotics enforcement
abroad. The annual review process, now required by law, forces Washington
into difficult choices between papering over problems or offending
otherwise friendly countries. It should be eliminated. But as long as
cereification remains on the books, the administration has a duty to report
truthfully to Congress and the American people. It has failed to do so in
the case of Mexico.