Jesus Reyes Heroles

Talk about baptism by fire. In a matter of days, the Clinton administration must issue its recommendation on whether to certify Mexico as a reliable ally in the war against drug trafficking, and thus qualify it for U.S. aid and other foreign loans. The weight of this will fall primarily on the shoulders of Jesus Reyes Heroles, Mexico’s new ambassador to Washington.

For the next six months, the 45-year-old MIT graduate will have to use all of his political skills, as well as his knowledge of the United States, on Capitol Hill. It will be no easy task to persuade a skeptical Congress that Mexico has done the best job in a decade to stop the narcotics flow into the United States, where 50% of all illegal drugs sold worldwide are consumed.

Throughout the certification process, Reyes Heroles will have to demonstrate he has the political ability to do the job. The complicated agenda between Mexico and the United States includes the difficult issues of human rights, trade, immigration and many other problems that arise between these dissimilar bordering nations.

Yet, Reyes Heroles seems confident he’ll succeed. He says he draws inspiration from his family, which has played a prominent role in Mexico’s politics for decades. His maternal great-grandfather fought in the 1910 revolution alongside its leader, Francisco I. Madero; his great-uncle was president of Mexico, and his grandfather was mayor of Mexico City. His father, also named Jesus Reyes Heroles, was an influential politician and historian. He served under six different presidents--even challenged the authoritarian power of three of them, and emerged unscathed.

But lineage aside, Reyes Heroles says he’s prepared for the job that, he insists, will be his last in public service. Trained as an economist, his professional life has been closely linked to the financial sector. He has a longtime ally in the Mexican White House, or Los Pinos: Years ago, he worked with President Ernesto Zedillo in the Bank of Mexico, his country’s version of the Federal Reserve Board. Reyes Heroles also worked in the Treasury, on the debt negotiations, at the time when Jesus Silva Herzog, his predecessor in the embassy, was the secretary.

He left public life for a short time, running his own financial consulting firm. But when his old friend Zedillo became president, Reyes Heroles returned to work for his party, the PRI, and then took a Cabinet post.

Reyes Heroles sat down to talk in his Mexican colonial house in San Angel, Mexico, soon after his confirmation as ambassador to the United States. He is married to Regina Cardoso, a literature teacher in Mexico, who also attended college in the United States. They have three children, ranging from age 7 to 16.

Question: How would you characterize the current status of the relationship between the United States and Mexico?

Answer: This is a culminating moment in the relationship, and both countries are beginning to harvest the benefits of that great accomplishment called the North American Free Trade Agreement, or NAFTA. Not only have trade and investment increased dramatically in both countries but, and more importantly, there’s been a change in attitude when conducting business on both sides of the border.

I can also see we are in for a “singular” time with presidential elections in the year 2000 and elections for governors in 1998 in both countries. Mexico has gone through important political changes that have brought a new balance of power with an unprecedented democratic depth. With the U.S., we have reached a new and different stage, no less intense or cordial.

Q: But do you characterize the current relationship as cordial? Isn’t there a lot of conflict?

A: Well, perhaps understanding is better than cordial. However, I do believe conflict and understanding will always coexist in the relationship and, right now, I think the level of conflict is countered by an adequate level of understanding.

The problems of the bilateral relationship are not exploding in our face. Quite the contrary. Faced with enormously complex situations, both countries have engaged in an understanding on how to resolve conflicts.

Q: What makes you think you are qualified to be the Mexican ambassador to Washington?

A: Both my personal and professional background. I was raised in a profoundly nationalistic family that has been deeply involved in public life in Mexico for many generations. I had the opportunity to study in Mexico and abroad. I spent four years living in Boston while doing a post-graduate degree, and that helped my understanding of the United States. Professionally, I worked in the finance sector for about 10 years and negotiated important international transactions that taught me how to succeed in that kind of environment. Also, I have the required political experience to deal with domestic and international issues.

Q: How are you going to deal with problems you’ll face early in your tour of duty--like the certification process?

A: I believe the certification process is tremendously unfair. There is no justification whatsoever under international law to have it. And the fact that it is a unilateral measure doesn’t foster the cooperation it allegedly pursues, it inhibits it.

Q: Do you believe Mexico does a fair job regarding confiscation of drugs and arresting drug dealers?

A: Very few countries in the world devote so many resources to the combat of drug-trafficking as Mexico does. And we do it to preserve our national public health, but also as a humanitarian gesture toward public health in other countries. The main reason, however, is that this is a struggle to protect our national security. Mexico is the country with the largest index of drug seizure in the world. Mexico’s effort has been widely recognized in the United States. Regarding apprehensions, perhaps we could improve; but in the last two years we have had some spectacular hits against the capos of the cartels. I would say we have done a much better job than our friends in the other side of the border--both in terms of quantity and quality.

During his visit to Mexico, President Clinton admitted that even though the U.S. makes up only about 5% of the world population, they consume about 50% of the drugs sold on the international market. But I don’t want to sound complacent--both countries should do even more in this difficult task.

Q: But there are a lot of people in the U.S. who believe drug-related corruption in Mexico is a huge problem. Is it?

A: Drug-related corruption is by no means an exclusive Mexican problem. And I don’t say this trying to justify it. Yes, we have to recognize corruption does exist in Mexico, but I honestly couldn’t say that there is more corruption in Mexico than in other countries--as some people may try to make us believe. We are concerned with corruption because it has an insidious effect on society.

Q: Does the U.S. have the right to demand that Mexico fix the illegal immigration problem?

A: The United States has every right to enforce its immigration law including the decision to stop immigrants from crossing the border. But Mexican law guarantees the free transit of people within the territory. Therefore Mexico cannot stop a person under the suspicion that he or she may be trying to cross the border.

Q: How do you solve the conflict created by the debate on illegal immigration?

A: The first thing we should do is to raise the level of consciousness on the immigration issue. I believe the recent Binational Study on Immigration is a first step in the right direction. What we should understand now is what are the underlying forces that create constant and numerous migratory movements. What are the demographic, economic and cultural implications of these migrations? What are their causes and what can be done to influence its behavior? Have we answered these questions?

To work out a solution, it is fundamental to keep sustained economic growth in Mexico--economic growth creates jobs. And that is already happening. Of course, economics is not the only reason why people migrate. There are many other cultural and historical elements that could help explain why some communities expel and some receive immigrants.

Q: What would you answer those who say Mexican immigrants take jobs away from American minorities?

A: I would answer that Mexican immigrants work on jobs that are available because other minorities have found better opportunities to work in jobs that pay higher wages.

Q: At this stage of the game could NAFTA be derailed?

A: I believe NAFTA has been the most important event in the bilateral relationship between the two countries in many, many decades. And I am not talking only about direct implications, such as acting as facilitator of trade and investment. It has changed deeply ingrained attitudes in both Mexicans and Americans regarding each other.

NAFTA marked the beginning of a policy of engagement and forced both countries to face up to the problems of the relationship. For Mexico, it marked the end of an era of a passive, perhaps defensive, policy vis-a-vis the U.S., and the adoption of a more pro-active policy that seeks to utilize our complementary and comparative advantages to our mutual benefit. The U.S. discovered the economic benefit of free trade with Mexico. It made the economies of North America much more competitive against their true trade adversaries--some Asia-Pacific and European countries. NAFTA could only be derailed if there was an 180-degree change in the bilateral relationship between Mexico and the US. And I don’t see that coming.

Q: How do you respond to those who say NAFTA has damaged the environment along the southern border?

A: Unfortunately, the beginning of the NAFTA implementation coincided with a recessionary period in the Mexican economy. It also happened at a time when the Mexican government was forced to stop several projects to strengthen the border’s infrastructure and improve environmental programs. Having said that, I should add that NAFTA has the mechanisms that will allow us to improve the environment on the border. Even admitting that entities such as NADBANK [North American Development Bank] and others have yet to show better results, the good news is that we are aware of the environmental problem in both sides of the border. Both countries also have set the goal of fixing it and we have the institutions that will help us solve the problem, we should help them mature.

Q: But there are people in the U.S. who feel Mexico is taking the lion’s share of NAFTA benefits. Is that so?

A: We should look at the trade balance in the last few years and consider the real economic situation of Mexico. Mexico’s economic contraction did influence U.S. exports. And the devaluation of the peso also influenced Mexican exports. But trade between both countries has grown dramatically since NAFTA.

Q: Mexico’s record on human rights continues to be abysmal. Isn’t it time to do something about it?

A: Yes. Mexico, like many other countries, has a long way to go to avoid human rights violations. There are serious human rights violations when Mexican immigrants are arrested in the United States--as we have seen on television. We must recognize that at the top of the government in Mexico there is a total commitment to respect human rights.

The challenge is to guarantee respect for human rights in the face of adverse factors, such as a rising level of common and organized crime and a debilitated judicial system. We should also consider that Mexico is a country where wages are low and the level of education is low. We should also factor in that Mexico does not have enough economic resources to combat a severe and serious offensive by powerful drug cartels. We already have a Human Rights Commission and there are many NGO’s (nongovernmental organizations) that keep a watch on human rights violations. We are not there yet, but I believe we are improving.

Q: Are you bracing yourself to face the U.S. Congress?

A: To have a good relationship with the U.S. Congress is one of my first priorities. What I have to do is to find the best way to initiate a dialogue with the U.S. Congress. We’ll have to learn how to deal with the congressmen and congresswomen, but also learn about the needs of their constituencies. I must understand what is the link between their district and Mexico and engage him or her in a conversation on the merits of a relationship with Mexico. I must visit them in Capitol Hill, but also in their hometowns.