VZCZCXRO6459
RR RUEHCD RUEHGD RUEHHO RUEHMC RUEHNG RUEHNL RUEHRD RUEHRS RUEHTM
DE RUEHME #5846/01 3182209
ZNY CCCCC ZZH
R 142209Z NOV 07
FM AMEMBASSY MEXICO
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 9578
INFO RUEHXC/ALL US CONSULATES IN MEXICO COLLECTIVE
RHEHNSC/NSC WASHDC
RUEADWD/DA WASHINGTON DC
RHEFDIA/DIA WASHINGTON DC
RHMFISS/CDR USSOUTHCOM MIAMI FL
RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHDC
RHMFISS/CDR USNORTHCOM
RUEAHLA/DEPT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
RUEATRS/DEPT OF TREASURY WASHDC
RUCPDOC/DEPT OF COMMERCE WASHDC

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 03 MEXICO 005846 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 11/14/2027 
TAGS: PGOV PREL SNAR PTER SMIL MX
SUBJECT: FOREIGN SECRETARY ESPINOSA COURTS CONGRESSIONAL 
SUPPORT FOR MERIDA INITIATIVE 
 
REF: MEXICO 5640 
 
Classified By: DCM Leslie A. Bassett. Reason: 1.4 (b),(d). 
 
¶1. (U) Summary: Responding to Congressional calls for the 
Executive to clarify the Merida Initiative, Foreign Secretary 
Patricia Espinosa testified before the Senate on October 22 
and before the Chamber of Deputies on October 31.  She was 
clear the Merida Initiative is not a formal accord requiring 
Congressional approval and that Mexican sovereignty would not 
be challenged.  She identified with Congressional concerns by 
noting the GOM could reject the cooperation package if the 
U.S. Congress established what Mexico considered onerous 
conditions.  Legislative reaction has generally been 
positive, with the PRD typically voicing the most resistance. 
 Although there have been few specific complaints about the 
substance of the security package, Mexican legislators have 
publicly complained about not being properly consulted by the 
Executive.  End summary. 
 
-------------------------- 
Reaching Out to the Senate 
-------------------------- 
 
¶2. (SBU) In her remarks to the Senate, Espinosa explained the 
Merida Initiative will involve training, equipment, and 
technology transfers, and not financial aid.  She stressed 
there would be no U.S. military or contractor presence in 
Mexico, or any other breach of Mexican sovereignty.  (Note: 
When Espinosa referred to "contractors," we assume this was 
shorthand for security contractors like Blackwater, which are 
not contemplated as part of the package.  In fact, NAS Mexico 
already employs five Personal Services Contractors to assist 
with program administration in areas like training, 
infrastructure, and aviation, and this number would increase 
significantly if the Merida Initiative receives full funding. 
 End note.)  Asked for a text of the agreement, the Secretary 
said it involved a bilateral political commitment and there 
was no written agreement or treaty, emphasizing that the U.S. 
had committed to taking responsibility for its share of the 
drug trafficking problem.  Espinosa added that "no type of 
conditions have been set" but acknowledged that Mexico would 
need to "assure that the resources provided under this 
arrangement are truly used for the purposes for which there 
were intended, assure that the equipment is well secured, and 
that there will be no negligence in the use of the 
equipment." 
 
¶3. (SBU) The discussion of counter-terrorist activities as a 
component of the Merida Initiative, including Espinosa's 
acknowledgment that the package envisions a program to 
digitize information on migration and apply detection and 
control measures on the southern border, drew criticism from 
some legislators.  PRD Senator Ricardo Monreal stated that 
the Merida Initiative responds more to U.S. security needs 
and to its fight against terrorism than to Mexico's law 
enforcement requirements, warning that Mexico risks becoming 
a "security contractor" for the U.S.  He added that the 
program could lead to a "denationalization of our national 
security system, and secondly to a criminalization of 
migration by deploying all of that technology and resources 
to stem the flow of migration, rather than against the 
illegal drug and weapons trade."  PRD Senate Coordinator 
Carlos Navarrete agreed that Mexico needs to be careful about 
counter-terrorism cooperation and avoid "buying into other 
people's quarrels."  Senate President Santiago Creel (PAN) 
struck a different tone, saying that while Mexico does not 
suffer the same threat of terrorism as the U.S., it still 
must not allow anyone to violate law and order. 
 
--------------------------------------------- ---- 
Congressional Criticism of Process, Not Substance 
--------------------------------------------- ---- 
 
¶4. (SBU) Mexican legislators and opinion leaders who support 
the cooperation agreement have nevertheless broadly 
criticized the Calderon administration for lack of 
transparency.  PRI Senator Manuel Bartlett Diaz told the 
press the Merida Initiative has been surrounded by "total 
confusion" since its inception, saying that Secretary 
Espinosa's Senate testimony added to "absolute uncertainty." 
He said her interpretation that the plan does not require 
 
MEXICO 00005846  002 OF 003 
 
 
Senate approval is inaccurate, adding that if the GOM presses 
forward without seeking Congressional approval then 
legislators should present a constitutional challenge in 
court.  In his meeting with Carl Meacham, the Senior Advisor 
on Western Hemisphere Affairs to the Senate Foreign Relations 
Committee, PRD Senator Tomas Torres stressed that Calderon 
was well advised on both political grounds to seek 
Congressional approval for any agreement with the U.S.  In 
view of the challenges Mexico faces in combating 
narco-trafficking, he believed legislators would be hard 
pressed to reject assistance from the U.S.  However, if 
Calderon insisted on moving ahead without Congressional 
consent, he would give opposition politicians the "favor" of 
an easy target for criticism.  While PAN Senator Luis Alberto 
Coppola strongly endorsed the Merida Initiative, he similarly 
believed the administration should seek Congressional 
approval. 
 
¶5. (SBU) Comments by Mexican Ambassador to the U.S. Arturo 
Sarukhan that Mexico would commit to $7 billion over three 
years for equipment, rehabilitation, and drug prevention 
stirred controversy here and were interpreted as getting out 
ahead of the Congress.  The Presidency issued a clarification 
saying the amount represents ongoing Mexican security 
spending and there would be no separate budget line item for 
the Merida Initiative.  Secretary Espinosa underscored the 
point that Mexico would not spend any additional funds on the 
program. 
 
----------------------------------- 
Outreach to the Chamber of Deputies 
----------------------------------- 
 
¶6. (SBU) Testifying before the Chamber of Deputies on October 
31 alongside officials from the Attorney General's Office 
(PGR) and the Secretariats of National Defense (Sedena) and 
Navy (Marina), Espinosa appealed for the Deputies' support. 
"Let us give ourselves the opportunity to face this struggle 
under better circumstances.  We cannot allow this threat to 
continue growing or presume that we can wage this battle 
alone," she remarked, adding that SRE is prepared to conduct 
an ongoing dialogue with Mexican lawmakers regarding the 
Merida Initiative.  She explained the agreement is based on 
international treaties ratified by the Senate and is 
consistent with the Comprehensive Strategy for Preventing and 
Combating Crime as well as the National Development Plan. 
She also referenced the Initiative's consistency with the 
1990 U.S.-Mexico Accord Against Narcotics Trafficking and 
Drug Dependency, and the multilateral Palermo Convention 
Against Organized Crime. 
 
¶7. (SBU) The Foreign Secretary accommodated Congressional 
concerns by suggesting Mexico could decide to reject the 
cooperation package if the U.S. Congress established certain 
conditions to approve funds.  Specifically, she told the 
Deputies, "we will conduct an extremely careful analysis of 
whatever results from this (U.S.) legislative process, in 
order to evaluate whether the result is compatible with our 
national interest, whether it fulfills Mexico's needs.  There 
is no obligation on the Mexican Government's part to accept 
this support, it is a political cooperation commitment that 
we have undertaken, in the understanding that if we act 
together we will be more effective on both sides of the 
border, but we will not rush into anything."  The Secretary 
stressed that under no circumstances would the cooperation 
agreement become a pretext to take action against migrants 
that use Mexico to enter the U.S. illegally. 
 
¶8. (SBU) Some Deputies belonging to the PRI, PRD, and 
Convergence Party expressed mistrust of the proposal and U.S. 
intentions.  PRI Deputies Jose Murat and Samuel Solis, backed 
by PRD Deputy Cuauhtemoc Sandoval, demanded to see the plan's 
core documents, which Espinosa responded do not exist.  She 
added, "should it become necessary to sign some document that 
requires Congressional approval under our legislation, we 
will come before this sovereign body for the necessary 
consultations and, if appropriate, submit it for your 
consideration."  PRI Chamber of Deputies Coordinator Emilio 
Gamboa said the GOM has an obligation to keep the legislative 
branch informed of the agreement's details, and Chamber 
President Ruth Zavaleta (PRD) remarked, "We would expect the 
document to be made public, not only for our benefit, but for 
 
MEXICO 00005846  003 OF 003 
 
 
all of society." 
 
¶9. (C) In private, Mexican legislators from each of the main 
three political parties have agreed that the security 
situation in Mexico is grave, that both countries bear 
responsibility for confronting narcotics trafficking and 
related criminality, and that the Merida Initiative 
represents a logical step in the effort to strengthen the 
relationship.  Members of Congress have told us privately 
that "conditionalities" imposed on Mexico by the U.S. would 
be carefully reviewed, and that Congress would likely react 
negatively to perceptions of onerous end-user requirements. 
Senate Foreign Relations Chairwoman Rosario Green (PRI) 
suggested that it would be necessary to create a watchdog 
group, including government representatives and senators, in 
order to supervise assistance received.  The PRD has been the 
most vocal in its concerns, calling on the USG to balance the 
security component of the package with development assistance. 
 
------- 
Comment 
------- 
 
¶10. (C) Despite their frustration with the perceived lack of 
transparency by the Executive, Mexican legislators recognize 
the security threat before their country and seem broadly in 
favor of enhanced security cooperation with the U.S.  In her 
testimonies before Senators and Deputies, Foreign Secretary 
Espinosa sought to reassure them the Merida Initiative is not 
an aid plan and will not challenge Mexican sovereignty.  She 
also signaled a willingness to work more closely with Mexican 
legislators, adding that the GOM will closely study any 
"conditionalities" placed on assistance by the U.S. Congress. 
 While Mexican legislators recognize that Congressional 
approval of the Merida Initiative is not likely needed and 
that full details will remain limited until the U.S. funds 
the package, they can be expected to posture along party 
lines and pressure the GOM for further disclosure of the 
contents of bilateral security negotiations. 
 
 
Visit Mexico City's Classified Web Site at 
http://www.state.sgov.gov/p/wha/mexicocity and the North American 
Partnership Blog at http://www.intelink.gov/communities/state/nap / 
GARZA