Contact Info for The Boston Herald:
Political comments heraldpol@delphi.com
Other oped comments heraldedit@delphi.com
FAX: BOSTON HERALD BOSTON MA 16174261865;
FAX: BOSTON HERALD BOSTON MA 16175421315;
FAX: BOSTON HERALD CTYDSK BOSTON MA 1617 5421315 ALICE MCQUILLAN;

Last week's Senate action on recertifying Mexico as an
"ally" in the drug war leaves much to be desired but is
probably the best course for now.

Each year, the president is required to disclose which
nations have been cooperative in fighting drugs. Those not
so designated face penalties, including trade sanctions,
though the president may waive the penalties.

Even though drug corruption is endemic in the Mexican
government (it was recently revealed that its drug czar was
on the payroll of the cartels), the Clinton administration
officially declared that our neighbor to the south has
"cooperated fully" in efforts to stem the drug trade.

There has been cooperation, but the absurdity of the
size of the assertion led to a revolt in the House. It
resolved to extend certification for only 90 days unless
the president reports on specific progress.

The Senate wouldn't swallow this. Its resolution, which
is acceptable to Clinton and the Mexican government, merely
provides for the president to report by Sept. 1 on specific
Mexican action on moneylaundering (Mexico failed to seize
$ 160 million in drug assets in Mexican banks), extradition
of drug lords and protecting our drug enforcement agents in
Mexico.

But there would be no automatic action. To decertify
Mexico after Sept. 1 would require starting from scratch.

The two countries share a common border and as bad as
things are now, they could get worse. They certainly would
get a lot worse if the Mexican government withdrew the
cooperation it is giving. That is a distinct possibility if
the House view were to carry the day.

Take the American drug agents working in Mexico. Where
would we be if the agents were thrown out of the country?
There's also something to be said for not creating
contemptible fictions in international affairs. At the same
time President Clinton certified Mexico, he refused to
restore certification to Colombia (dropped last year)
despite a great deal of cooperation in the past 12 months
from the Colombian Congress, police and armed forces. What
incentive do those institutions have for continued
cooperation?

Besides Colombia, the only countries penalized by the
certification process are incorrigibles who wouldn't get
anything anyway Nigeria, Afghanistan, Myanmar (Burma),
Syria and Iran. (Belize, Lebanon and Pakistan also were
decertified, but penalties were waived.)

It's time to come up with a better policy.