GLOSSING OVER MEXICO'S DRUG CERTIFICATION

MEXICO CITY - Forget the sunshine, lollipops and roses. Come February,
Mexican government officials tend to neglect the atmospherics of love and
fixate instead on those of war - the one against nose candy, cannabis and
poppies.

Mexico has come to associate February with the run-up to the annual
decision by the U.S. government on whether to certify countries abroad as
fully cooperating with Washington's fight against international drug
trafficking.

Though the law has received broadsides in the United States and abroad, the
Clinton administration must still inform Congress by March 1 as to whether
Mexico and other countries are in compliance.

Certainly, drug certification is the bee buzzing in the bonnets of Atty.
Gen. Jorge Madrazo and Secretary of Foreign Relations Rosario Green. In
separate interviews, Madrazo and Green insisted that Mexico is fully
engaged in the drug war. But in discussing official Washington's judgment
of Mexico's efforts to curb the northward flow of cocaine, marijuana,
heroin and methamphetamines, their eyes seem to convey the weary message of
"Ay, Chihuahua." If that is an accurate reading, "Oh, brother," or "Oy vey"
are the appropriate translations.

Resurrecting a surprisingly nationalist posture redolent of pre-NAFTA days,
Madrazo said his government will continue to fight the drug war because,
"for Mexico, fighting drugs is a matter of national security." Secretary
Green added that it was also a matter of national sovereignty.

Green recently took over the reins of Mexican diplomacy from Jose Angel
Gurria, the new finance minister and presidential hopeful. Green clarified
that the highly touted agreement on drugs signed by the United States and
Mexico last year was not so much an agreement as "a statement recognizing
common strategies."

Madrazo believes that it may be the United States that is falling down on
the job. For all the accolades he bestows on Atty. Gen. Janet Reno and the
head of the Office of National Drug Control Policy, Barry McCaffrey,
Madrazo views certain U.S. law enforcement agencies as being less
cooperative with Mexico.

The Mexican attorney general prefaces his point by citing his department's
record in fighting narco-trafficking, which is estimated to be a $30
billion business in Mexico. Whether in arresting drug traffickers,
replacing officials corrupted by drug money, interdicting huge drug
shipments or challenging widespread money laundering, all positive
indicators are up, he says.

Yet, asked about the accuracy of a recent report in the Mexico City daily
El Universal that Mexico's leading drug cartels have now established a
powerful alliance known as "The Federation," Madrazo said: "Apparently, the
article was based on sources in the (U.S.) Drug Enforcement Administration.
We don't have sufficient evidence to support this statement. Nevertheless,
I can't rule it out." Moving in for the tweak, he added: "It surprises me
that I had to read about it in a newspaper, given that I talk to the DEA
constantly."

U.S. drug fighters have in the past had a ready answer to such gibes. They
have repeatedly pointed out that the security of their agents and
informants has occasionally been compromised by Mexican police and judicial
officials bought off by drug lords.

Indeed, the February 1996 arrest on drug corruption charges of Gen. Jesus
Gutierrez Rebollo, President Ernesto Zedillo's hand-picked drug czar and
erstwhile recipient of backslaps from McCaffrey, remains a troubling symbol
of serious misjudgments at the highest levels of both governments. Before
that, it was the 1985 kidnap-murder of "Kiki" Camarena by drug traffickers,
who, it later turned out, were the beneficiaries of protection by corrupt
police and judges.

Atty. Gen. Madrazo acknowledges there may be growing problems. While the
Mexican army on any given day has an average of 20,000 troops eradicating
drug crops, corruption in the army is year another sticking point. He
acknowledges that his office recently arrested another Mexican army
general, albeit a retiree, for colluding with the cartels.

Given the gamut of key issues on the binational agenda, the drug issue
cannot be allowed to drive the U.S.-Mexico relationship as a whole. In the
end, Congress will have no choice but to certify Mexico as a cooperating
partner.

Yet once the demands of the law are squared with political and economic
imperatives, the Clinton administration should consider disabusing itself
of the idea that everything is coming up roses. For a reality check, they
may wish to consider the gamut of increasingly nationalistic, sometimes
self-serving but also, on occasion, painfully honest, remarks emanating
from Mexico City.