Source: San Jose Mercury News Contact: Mon, 16 Feb 1998 Author: Stanley Meisler - LA Times Editor Note: This article also appeared in the LATimes as "U.S. Wants Drug Treaty to Replace Certification" on Mon, 16 Feb 1998 U.S. WANTS NEW WAY TO GET COUNTRIES TO FIGHT DRUGS WASHINGTON -- The Clinton administration, weary of the bruising annual debate with Congress over whether to certify that Mexico and other nations are cooperating in the war on illicit drugs, wants to drop that process altogether and replace it with an international treaty. A Western Hemisphere treaty on drugs has been discussed for several years. For the first time, however, the Clinton administration has said it regards the treaty as a substitute for certification -- rather than an extra weapon in the drug fight. ``I hope in five years the United States, as one of 31 or 30 countries, has become part of a multinational attack,'' said Gen. Barry McCaffrey, the White House anti-narcotics czar. ``As we do, that will bury the certification process.'' Vision of an alliance The proposed anti-drug treaty would create a Western Hemisphere alliance to fight the production and transportation of drugs and set up a secretariat to make sure that alliance members comply with its provisions. The treaty will have a prominent other Western Hemisphere l place on the agenda when President Clinton and eaders meet at the Summit of the Americas in Santiago, Chile, in April. The certification system was slipped into the Reagan administration's omnibus anti-drug law in 1986 by members of Congress who believed a weapon was needed to pressure other countries into preventing the production or transport of drugs on their territory. The measure was barely noticed in news reports at the time but has since become one of the most controversial aspects of U.S. drug policy. The prospects for dropping certification are uncertain. There is still strong support for it within Congress, which has the power under the law of reversing the president's certification rulings within 30 days. It will take time for the United States and the other Western Hemisphere countries to work out a tough treaty that might persuade Congress that there was an effective substitute for the process. Persuasive presence But the willingness of McCaffrey -- who is highly respected by Congress -- to talk for the first time about burying certification means that the Clinton administration is convinced that an alternative to the combative system must be found. Any change in the certification system would come too late to head off this month's certification report card and a probable repetition of last year's battle over Mexico. Under the law, the State Department must certify by March 1 every year whether countries where drug production and transport occur are cooperating fully with the United States to halt the trade. Countries that fail are subject to a cut in U.S. foreign aid and other sanctions. The department certified Mexico last year, as it had in the past. Refusal to do so would have created a foreign-policy mess, humiliating Mexico, damaging its cooperation in the anti-drug effort and poisoning U.S.-Mexican relations on many issues. Even so, many members of Congress berated the administration for the decision. As evidence that Mexico had failed as a cooperative partner in the drug fight, they cited endemic corruption and the shocking disclosure that Mexico's federal anti-narcotics czar had actually been on the payroll of a drug cartel. Some State Department officials and members of Congress insist that certification has worked in that it has pressured countries to become aggressive in anti-drug campaigns. But it has generated resentful anger every year as foreign countries bristle at the prospect of the United States sitting in judgment of them and issuing a public report card. Moreover, it has created tension between the White House and members of Congress who feel the administration certifies some countries for fear of offending them. Mexico's disdain Mexican officials have consistently opposed the process as unilateral and inappropriate. Among those in favor of scrapping the certification process is Sen. Paul Coverdell, R-Ga., who describes the nation's strategy in the international battle against drugs as flawed. Coverdell, a former Peace Corps director, is chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere, and, according to his staff, has been in close contact with McCaffrey about the proposed international treaty. Coverdell has scheduled a hearing before the end of this month to review the certification process. The administration is expected to release this year's decisions on certification before then.