LAWMAKERS TO EVALUATE MERIDA INITIATIVE'S SUCCESS

EL PASO -- As drug violence claims lives every day across the border in
Juarez, lingering questions about the Merida Initiative may come to dog
lawmakers, who could find themselves under pressure if the cooperative
agreement to fight drugs is not a success.

Security experts have urged Congress to consider a range of indicators
when evaluating the progress of the Merida Initiative.

Whether the initiative will work and whether benchmarks have been set to
measure success of failure remain key questions for lawmakers and local
officials, some of whom are skeptical about the three-year, $1.4 billion
plan.

Ray Walser, an analyst with the conservative Heritage Foundation think
tank in Washington, D.C., said the Merida Initiative appears to be sound
policy because it was put together by both governments. The Heritage
Foundation analyzes the federal government's public policy programs.

"From a technical standpoint it is a good plan," said Walser, a former
foreign service officer for the U.S. "It will provide Mexico the equipment
it needs right now to battle the cartels."

In El Paso, elected officials are less certain, especially with their
backs against widespread drug violence just across the river in Juarez.
Since January 2008, more than 1,800 people have been killed in Juarez,
most in what police think are drug-related executions.

Corruption feared

Meanwhile, fears abound that money, materials and services from the Merida
Initiative won't make it to their intended recipients, with corruption
getting in the way and the potential for worsening violence as drug
cartels continue to clash.

"The problem with the plan is that there are no guarantees that the money
won't find its way back to the cartels," said Eastridge/Mid-Valley city
Rep. Steve Ortega, whose district abuts the Rio Grande southeast of
Downtown El Paso.

In October 2008, 35 officials in an elite unit of the Mexican attorney
general's office were fired or arrested after becoming implicated in a
payoff scheme for sensitive information about anti-drug activities. In
December 2008, Mexican President Felipe Calderon said that about 11,500
law enforcement and other government employees had been fined a total of
nearly $300 million for corruption in the past two years, according to a
Congressional Research Service report released in January.

Congress in its fiscal year 2008 spending appropriation for the Merida
Initiative stipulated that none of the money for the plan may be made
available to participating countries for budget support or in cash. But
whether that will serve as an effective stopgap against corruption remains
to be seen. As a safeguard, lawmakers delayed appropriating money for the
Merida Initiative for 2009 and 2010 -- an indication that they, too, have
fears that money could fall into the wrong hands.

Congress is expected to again consider funding for the Merida Initiative
this session.

Human rights

Measurable results could be imperative to security in the Western
Hemisphere. A key worry among U.S. lawmakers has been Mexico's response to
allegations of human-rights violations, which prompted Congress to
withhold a portion of money for fiscal year 2008 pending a State
Department report aimed at determining whether transparency and
accountability of federal police forces have improved.

Congress also is requiring the State Department to report on whether the
Mexican judicial system is prosecuting police and military forces accused
of human-rights violations and whether the Mexican government is
prohibiting the use of testimony obtained through torture or other ill
treatment.

Mexico's Human Rights Commission received 634 reports of human-rights
abuses by Mexican military forces between December 2006 and May 2008, the
Congressional Research Service report said. State Department officials,
who referred to the progress reports to be provided to Congress as "15
percent reports," said they have yet to submit them to lawmakers.

Security and Mexico experts also are urging lawmakers to learn from Plan
Colombia, a $6 billion effort begun in 2000 to improve security and reduce
the flow of narcotics trafficking in the South American country.

An October 2008 report by the General Accountability Office concluded that
while Plan Colombia improved security conditions in the South American
country, Colombia remains the largest producer of cocaine in the world and
the flow of drugs into the United States has not been significantly
reduced.

'Night and day'

U.S. Rep. Silvestre Reyes, D-Texas, called the two drug fighting
initiatives incomparable.

"The difference is night and day," Reyes said about the two plans. "Plan
Colombia includes U.S. armed personnel in that country, as well as a
broader array of weapons and monitoring equipment. We will not be sending
any personnel into Mexico under the Merida plan.

"Colombia was on the verge of becoming a narco-state when we were asked to
help," Reyes said.

Though Congress has yet to receive reports from the State Department, the
Merida Initiative High-Level Consultative Group, an organization of
diplomatic, military and law enforcement agencies from both countries, in
December issued a joint statement that laid out objectives of the
initiative that ultimately could measure the success or failure of the
cooperative security and drug trafficking effort.

"The breadth and depth of the cooperation between the United States and
Mexico in confronting transnational organized crime and security threats
requires new institutional mechanisms to ensure efficient coordination,
the timely use of operational intelligence and the efficient use of
resources," the statement said.

"Our governments intend therefore to establish before the end of 2009 a
bilateral follow-up and implementation mechanism in Mexico City where
officials of the United States and Mexico will work together to carry out
mutually agreed assistance projects, monitor results, and revise and
update cooperative activities under the Merida Initiative."

The consulting group recommended that members meet again in 2009 to review
accomplishments and priorities and to consider new and revised objectives.