NEW SLATE OF INTERPARLIAMENTARY GROUP PARTICIPANTS

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 MEXICO 003111 SIPDIS SENSITIVE SIPDIS FOR WHA/MEX, INR, INL E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: PGOV PREL ECON MX SUBJECT: NEW SLATE OF INTERPARLIAMENTARY GROUP PARTICIPANTS DISCUSS COMPETITIVENESS, MIGRATION, AND SECURITY THIS CABLE IS SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED. PLEASE HANDLE ACCORDINGLY. ¶1. (SBU) Summary. Focusing this year on economic competitiveness, immigration and security/law enforcement, legislators at the 46th annual Interparliamentary Groups (IPG) agreed their countries shared common stakes in economic development and improved security. Coming as it did two days after the Senate's comprehensive immigration reform bill had stalled, however, discussion of migration issues was spirited and contentious. A wide range of opinions divided U.S. legislators from each other as well as from their Mexican counterparts. Finally, talk of whether and how the two countries might better work together in combating narcotics-trafficking and violence touched off a brief media flurry in Mexico that SRE sought to diffuse with a press release clarifying the nature of U.S. - Mexican discussions on counter-narcotics cooperation. End Summary. ¶2. (SBU) Overall the tone of the conference was cordial. Rapport established in a variety of informal settings was evident throughout the conference proceedings. Private conversations with several Mexican legislators revealed some frustration that Mexico's attendance was disproportionate to that of the U.S. Opening the working sessions, the head of the Senate's North America Committee Ricardo Garcia Cervantes lamented the absence of his U.S. Senate counterparts. The Mexican delegation, however, graciously accepted the regrets expressed on behalf of the absent U.S. senators by U.S. delegation head Ed Pastor (D Texas). -------------- -------------- A Task Force to Promote Competitiveness along Border -------------- -------------- ¶3. (SBU) Senator Eloy Cantu (PRI) launched the discussion of economic competitiveness with a proposal that an IPG Task Force be established to help promote development along the shared border. Citing what he said were similar economic zones around the world, and noting the impact already robust cross border trade was having in northern Mexico and along the southwest U.S. border, he argued that the border area was a zone of potential rich prosperity that the IPG should foster. A congressional task force, he suggested, meeting periodically throughout the year could identify and recommend legislation and programs in both countries to facilitate regional economic alliances and activities. ¶4. (SBU) The idea met with widespread approval among both U.S. and Mexican legislators and generated several offers to participate. Representative Ciro Rodriguez (D-Texas) was first to second the suggestion, although he noted that the NADBank was already involved in infrastructure development and that its efforts to promote economic growth along the border could be usefully expanded with an infusion of greater resources. Other U.S. legislators, while similarly encouraging, touched on the inter-play between security, migration and economic development and stressed the importance of also promoting development in Southern Mexico. ¶5. (SBU) Garcia Cervantes and Pastor agreed that, absent specific objections from IPG members, the suggestion would be considered adopted; work on the details would begin in coming months. -------------- Migration a Divisive Issue -------------- ¶6. (SBU) By agreement between the two delegations, the U.S. side presented a state-of-play report on the comprehensive immigration reform bill. Despite the Senate's failure to end debate on the bill and move it forward for a vote, Silvestre Reyes (D-Texas) offered that the reform initiative was still viable. Senator Reid will likely bring up another vote to move the legislation forward within two weeks, he said. A trade-off might be allowing for discussion of additional amendments being sought by Republican lawmakers. Reyes promised that the House would bring up a bill if the Senate passed its own version of the legislation. Linda Sanchez added that the House effort would be a compromise bill similar to what the Senate might pass. It made no sense to offer up a more "progressive" piece of legislation that stood little chance of passage. Similarly, she said, the House would only bring its reform package forward if the Senate bill passed. ¶7. (SBU) Interventions by Mexican legislators tended to focus on variations of the following points: MEXICO 00003111 002 OF 003 -- Mexican migrants in the U.S. contribute to both the U.S. and Mexican economies. -- Mexico understands that it is the U.S.'s sovereign right to decide how to deal with its illegal immigrants. -- Nevertheless, Mexicans consider illegal migration to the U.S. from a human rights perspective: anti-immigrant sentiments and efforts to undermine the rights of migrants in recent years in the U.S. are counterproductive. -- Physical barriers will not stem the flow of migrants to the U.S. as long as the economies of both countries remain asymmetric; the U.S., with the dominant economy, needs to carry more weight and somehow help Mexico create the jobs needed to keep migrants at home. ¶8. (SBU) The discussion also occasioned disagreement among U.S. legislators. Democratic panel members tended to be more optimistic about the prospects for near-term immigration reform than their Republican counterparts. Linda Sanchez suggested there may be other ways to move it forward if the current Senate effort fails, by crafting separate legislation that addresses the constituent elements of the package. Republican interlocutors, while also generally supportive of a reform effort, focused their comments on the failings of the 1986 reform law and the utility of border security measures such as fencing. Some called for more emphasis on employer sanctions in the United States to stem illegal migration (a measure also endorsed by some Democrats at the table). When Sanchez suggested that most Americans and their legislators believe the U.S. needs to regularize the status of illegal migrants in the U.S., Representative Weller disagreed, saying the so-called "path to citizenship" was the element in the cu rrent legislation that was most divisive. Remove it, he said, and the current bill would pass. -------------- -------------- Off-hand Comment on Security Cooperation Leads to Media Flurry in Mexico -------------- -------------- ¶9. (SBU) Near the end of the day, after a somewhat roundabout discussion of law enforcement priorities in Mexico, legislators touched briefly on the modalities of expanding counter-narcotics cooperation. Representative Pastor asked his Mexican counterparts what the U.S. could specifically do to help. The U.S. Congress needed a specific request to which it could respond, he said. At that point, Representative Reyes noted that the Calderon administration had expressed interest in expanded U.S. support and that discussions had taken place between the two governments. He provided no details regarding the nature of the request and made no reference to a Plan Colombia in Mexico. ¶10. (SBU) The only reference to Plan Colombia came from Representative Mike McCaul (R-Texas) who recognized that it was "not applicable" in Mexico when he pledged greater U.S. cooperation to Mexico's counter-narcotics effort. After Mexican delegation head Garcia Cervantes said the Mexican legislature would have to defer to the executive branch on assistance requests, both sides moved on and ended the discussion amiably. ¶11. (SBU) According to media accounts, however, two PRD legislators complained privately to reporters that Reyes and other U.S. representatives had surprised them by outlining levels of ongoing U.S. assistance to Mexico and well as plans for future assistance. "From what Reyes said, I have the impression that cooperation between the U.S. and Mexico is very advanced and that the government hasn't told us anything(They are applying the same kind of technical and intelligence assistance to the Mexican government that they are using against Colombian insurgents," said the PRD's Raymundo Cardenas. ¶12. (SBU) Quick off the mark in response were both Mexico's Ambassador Sarukhan (who had attended the IPG) and Mexico's Foreign Relations Secretariat. Sarukhan gathered reporters and confirmed that the two governments are talking about how the U.S. can do more to assist Mexico, but denied Mexico was seeking its own version of Plan Colombia. "There could not be any such plan because realities are very different in Mexico," he told reporters. For its part, SRE issued a statement later in the evening (emailed to WHA) outlining current cooperation and confirming that the GOM had expanded consultations with the U.S. MEXICO 00003111 003 OF 003 ¶13. (SBU) Comment: It is unfortunate that an off-hand comment has led to grand-standing among Mexican legislators. The issue of whether a Plan Colombia for Mexico was being fashioned received front-page treatment in Sunday papers and continues to generate calls by opposition legislators for the GOM to clarify the nature of U.S.-Mexican discussions on assistance. The public hoopla does not reflect the character of the discussions that took place, however. An almost entirely new slate of Mexican legislators comprised the Mexican delegations (with two holdovers). Members of the group had the opportunity to forge ties with their U.S. counterparts, vent on the issue of migration and, more importantly, get their first up-close-and-personal look at how reasonable men and women in the U.S. can disagree over an issue of fundamental importance to the bilateral relationship. End Comment. 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