The Honorable Antonio O. Garza

U.S. Ambassador (Ret.)

"Hemispheric Truths"

Speech before the San Antonio World Affairs Council

Feb. 24, 2010

As prepared for delivery; the Ambassador may deviate from prepared remarks.

Thank you --------for that kind introduction.

I'd like to begin my comments by applauding the membership of the world affairs council for putting a spotlight on global issues here in San Antonio.

It's especially meaningful to me to be here tonight to join you in honoring two great Texans, Red and Charline McCombs.

Much has been said and written about Red and his extraordinary talent for business, and no one who has ever met Charline, has not been moved by her abundant grace and extraordinary spirit. And, one cannot even begin to imagine the lives they have touched through their generosity to the University of Texas and M D Anderson, and the lives they have changed by truly living out their faith..........the two of you honor all of us by your presence, and inspire by your lives.

You know, talking to San Antonians about Mexico is a tall order. Folks in this city know better than anyone else how important the familial, cultural and commercial ties are that link Mexico and the United States.

Each of you understands the realities of a relationship that is far more complex than the heated sound bites over immigration and trade would lead us to believe.

And, I don't have to tell you that with more than a billion dollars of trade a day between our two countries and one million plus people crossing that border each day our relationship with Mexico is unique.

And one need spend but a few minutes in San Antonio to appreciate the vibrancy and rich contribution that Mexico, its people and descendants make to our own country each and every day.

But, what I'll ask you to do tonight is begin to view Mexico as more than a neighbor and country we trade with and to view Mexico as a fully fledged strategic partner.

In November 2002, I assumed the post of ambassador to Mexico.  At that time a debate was raging at the United Nations about the use of force in Iraq, and how best to confront terrorists.

As you know, Mexico was on the U.N. Security Council, and while they ultimately made clear that they would not support the U.S. sponsored resolution, a tremendous amount of effort was already going into building the type of security framework needed to protect both country's interests.

In the wake of the October 2002 terrorist attacks on western tourists in Bali, we knew that U.S. tourists and Mexico's tourism sector might be a target.

And, if terrorists could strike at Mexico's oil production and disrupt the over 1 million barrels per day headed north, they would not only be hurting the U.S. economically, they would cripple Mexico, a country which depends on oil revenues for nearly 40 percent of its public finances.

NAFTA was already an acknowledged success, and we'd all become accustomed to the ritual platitudes about friendship, but what was less widely known was how little intelligence infrastructure really existed.

We were exchanging information, but we were a long way from sharing real intelligence, and doing it in real time...... and, that's the only way that it can be truly effective.

The ability to access passenger lists for incoming flights to the U.S. was rudimentary; protocols for interrogating people of interest in Mexico had to be formulated; we needed to establish procedures for identifying and vetting those we would be comfortable working with; and, we all knew how porous both countries southern borders were.

Out of necessity and shared self-interest we had to set aside decades of mistrust to begin building a strategic security alliance, and, while I knew we were doing the same things with countries in the region willing to work with us, I also knew, there were those that weren't going to be very reliable.

I remember at the time thinking how critics and comedians had mocked Ronald Reagan for his observation that the communists in Central America were only two days by bus from Harlingen, Texas and realizing that what we were up against was quite different, and in many ways far more perilous.

While we suspected it then, it is clear now, that in the Western Hemisphere, Iran has built a strategic relationship with Hugo Chavez of Venezuela, a bully who has adopted a socialist ideology to advance his ambitions of exercising raw power.

And, unlike the Sandanista's of the 80's, Venezuela is not a poor, third world proxy in a larger strategic conflict, but a nation fueled by large quantities of petro-dollars, in alliance with Iranian extremists, who also possess energy resources, and well-documented terrorist intentions.

And, it's those same petro-dollars that have allowed Chavez to build alliances throughout the region in countries such as Bolivia, Ecuador, Cuba and Nicaragua, and there are others susceptible simply by virtue of faltering economies, and weak governmental institutions.

Our conflicts today are not so much about the competing ideologies of capitalism and communism, though those debates remain alive.  Terrorists do not seek to corrupt our minds with long discredited theory, they only seek to do us harm, and as President Reagan might have pointed out, with friends only two days by bus to Harlingen.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton recently made her feelings clear when she said countries in Latin America should  "think twice" about their ties with the Islamic Republic of Iran and labeled Iran as "the major supporter , promoter and exporter of terrorism in the world today."

So the first point I'd want to make is that we can't view our relationship with Mexico in a vacuum.  We must look at that relationship in the context of the politics and security of the entire western hemisphere we must embrace Mexico as a full partner in our future.  And, in a post 9-11 world, we must recognize that the stakes could not be higher.

Some might scoff at the notion of a Mexico capable of partnering in securing our continent, when the Mexican government is at war with four major drug cartels and several regional organizations.

And, I'd be the first to tell you that if all you read were the daily headlines out of Mexico and saw the shocking pictures of brutal massacres in border towns like Juarez, you'd think Mexico is losing its battle.

But, beyond the headlines you will find what Paul Harvey used to call "the rest of the story," and that is that crime and violence-aggravated by Mexico's economic crisis in 2009-has, ironically, deepened ties with the United States and fostered an urgency in that country about addressing its challenges.

And, the rest of the story also includes one of an extraordinarily courageous president in Felipe Calderón and country that has demonstrated it is serious about cracking down on organized crime, dismantling drug cartels and prosecuting corrupt officials.

So yes, while cities such as Ciudad Juarez bear the brunt of drug-related killing and violence, homicide rates across the country have steadily declined since 2007 and Mexico City, the second largest city in the world, has seen its violent death rate drop to near that of Los Angeles, and less than one-third of that of Washington, D.C.

Last year the government of Mexico seized record amounts of guns, cash and illegal drugs. They are running joint military and civilian law enforcement operations with 45,000 troops and 5,000 federal police in 18 states.  They have dismantled entire police departments and taken operational control of cities marred by drug related violence.

Extraditions of drug kingpins to the U.S. are at record levels and the leaders of the Gulf Cartel and Beltran Leyva organizations are now in prison or dead.   And, all these successes are due in part to the fact that we are now exchanging not only information, but intelligence, and in real time.

In the last year of the Bush Administration the United States agreed to fund the 3 -year, $ 1.5 billion Merida Initiative, an effort that President Obama has shown strong support for and is directed towards training, equipment and intelligence, all supplementing the billions of dollars being spent annually by the Mexican government on security.

Clearly Mexico is committed, and it would be a mistake of historic proportion and with profound implications for both the U.S. and Mexico if we failed to support their efforts in every way possible and for however long might be necessary.

Either we support and partner with Mexico; or we will have a very different neighbor. The Mexican people are at a crossroads, in terms of culture, language and identity they clearly have an affinity for Latin America, but their aspirations are modern. What the Mexican people want is security, prosperity and stability.

Mexicans want to be a full partner in a partnership based on mutual interests and ideals, and it's in our interests that they not only succeed along that path, but that others in the region see them succeed.

Mexico today is quite different from that of even a decade ago; it's more democratic, more open in its relationship with the United States, increasingly assertive on international issues.

And, coming off a year of 7 percent negative growth, elections in 12 states over the next two years, and a presidential election in 2012, the Mexican people are beginning to debate with urgency the need to enact real structural reform aimed at making the marketplace competitive, and the political arena more accountable.

Mexico appears ready to take on the tough issues, like the nearly unchecked power of public and private sector monopolies, re-election and the role of the political parties, and how to be more competitive and secure in today's world.

And, while Mexico charts its course for the next decade, our role must not simply be to applaud, but continue to partner with them on security, so that reform can be enacted and democracy take root, free of the influence of cartel money and free of terrorist threats.

And, let's face it; we need to step up in other areas. We need to be doing more about our insatiable demand for drugs, doing more to stem the flow of arms and drug money into Mexico, remaining true to our NAFTA commitment to allow Mexican trucks to operate north of the border; and yes, it's time to show some progress on immigration reform.

There are an estimated 12-15 million Mexicans and others from around the hemisphere living outside their home countries, a great many work in the United States, often without documents.  We are talking about our fellow human beings.  People, who simply want to feed, clothe and shelter their families.

America is a great nation, a generous country, one built by immigrants.  It's time we brought people out of the shadows and truly into our communities, and let them become part of that wonderful tapestry that has always made us better and stronger as a nation.

And, while I'd like to think immigration reform is possible for all the right reasons, I'm also willing to concede self -interest, because I know that if a portion of what we are now spending to track down and deport the cook, carpenter, caregiver and others we are putting to work were invested in building the economies and intelligence capabilities of our partners in the region, we'd all be safer and more prosperous.

So, how we build on our partnership with Mexico is critical not only to our own interests, but will be watched closely by others.  And, with presidential elections soon to be held in Brazil, Colombia, Peru and Venezuela, it's clear that the next two years will set the course for this decade.

Chavez's hold on power in Venezuela may be waning, but you simply can't count him out, and as he becomes more desperate, one can only imagine what he might be capable of, either to hold onto power, or to do harm.

The recent tragedy in Haiti has served as a stark reminder: not only of how fragile life is, but also of America's unique ability to pull together resources, and working with others in the region, respond in a generous and humanitarian fashion.

President Obama's decision to ask former Presidents Clinton and Bush to lead the effort has sent a clear signal that in times of need; our decency transcends the politics of the day.

As was the case here at home, this past year was a challenging one economically for many in Latin America, but those countries that have weathered the crisis best are those that are open: openly having elections, opening their markets, and openly taking steps towards being more competitive.

One noted economist observed, "this may well be the first time since Latin America gained its independence in the early 1800's that a major economic contraction in the industrialized world has not caused a wave of currency , sovereign debt or banking crises in the region."

So, as many countries in Latin America prepare to celebrate 200 years of independence, they have built stronger foundations and are ready to move into an era of modernity.  But in a fickle and flat world they are not asking "where were you when; but rather, where are you now?"

And, what they see is an America seemingly standing still, an America still the largest engine for growth, but now competing alongside countries like China, which has seen its trade in Latin America increase ten-fold in the last decade and has made it clear that their efforts will be focused on the region's rich agriculture, energy and mineral sectors.

The same day that Secretary Clinton warned Latin American countries about their getting too close to Iran she also said "we have no problem with any country such as China engaging in economic activity with any country, but we don't want to see corruption that undermines the sustainability of the economy and the environment, and the natural resources of any country."

Secretary Clinton is right, but trying to hold others accountable from a distance and on foreign soil is a defensive strategy, one that assuredly will stoke resentment and anti-American feeling and charges that we are trying to dictate from the sidelines.

America must move away from the protectionist instincts that have gripped our country these past few years.  It's time for Congress to approve trade agreements with Colombia and Panama that has languished there for too long.

The U.S. should continue to engage aggressively with Brazil, Chile and Peru and in Central America and the Caribbean.  We need to broaden and deepen our ties to El Salvador and the Dominican Republic, all aimed at paving the way for more growth, more prosperity, more security.

The global terrorist infrastructure does not have the resources or firepower we have as a nation, nor do they have the capacity to create wealth, only destroy it. But they are not standing still and that's why we must be active.

Real partnership in Latin America is the only way forward; and it won't be easy. But, if I have learned nothing else, it is only through education, investment and trade, that people can be moved out of poverty.

Only where wealth is created and people have ownership in that wealth, will they feel they have interests worth protecting, worth securing, worth keeping safe from those that see the world quite differently.

History has shown that there is no country on the face of the earth that has been a more powerful force for good in the world than the United States.  And, you're not looking at someone who has ever found the notion of America's exceptionalism offensive, or even debatable.

What the region needs is more engagement from the United States, not less.  But, today's  exceptionalism cannot be defined by dominance, but must be one informed by strength and tethered to our values; and, then shared as partners, walking and working alongside others in the region toward prosperity and security.

Thank you and goodnight.

+ + +