Love thy neighbor.

What does a U.S. president with a soft spot for Mexico, but virtually no foreign policy experience, spell for policy toward the region?

The good news is that George W. Bush has a soft spot for Latin America. Better yet, he has an affinity for Mexico and a growing personal relationship with President Vicente Fox. Will this translate into more comprehensive policies toward Latin America than those his predecessors have undertaken?

There are signs that Latin America, and especially Mexico, may assume a priority not assigned to it by previous U.S. administrations. This assumption begins with the fact that Bush's first presidential trip abroad was to Mexico (providing endless consternation for Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chretien, whose country has traditionally been the first destination for new U.S. presidents).

Unfortunately, however, any assessment of the new U.S. president's potential agenda for the region, and the intensity with which he may pursue that agenda, will show that it is wanting. Beyond his term as governor of Texas and three trips overseas in the course of his entire life, Bush has virtually no record to examine as far as operating in the foreign arena. Because of this, Bush will rely on his Cabinet members to shape foreign policy, and the people he has chosen to fill his senior Cabinet positions have little experience in the Latin American region. Their priorities will be to address the traditional menu of foreign policy issues the United States faces.

It may be safe to conclude that whatever U.S. policies and priorities emerge from a Bush administration for Latin America, and especially Mexico, they will have to come from the president himself. But given his experience, this bodes ill for those hoping that Mexican and Latin American issues will occupy a pole position in the new administration.

THE PRESIDENT'S MEN AND WOMEN

The heads of Bush's foreign policy are his Vice President Dick Cheney and his Secretary of State General Colin Powell. This is unconventional, given the tradition for the president and secretary of state to take the lead roles in U.S. foreign affairs. But the consensus in Washington is that, given, Bush's inexperience, Cheney will take a much larger role in international issues than his vice-presidential predecessors. Since Cheney played a major part in selecting Cabinet members, he has effectively set such policy in motion.

Cheney has a great deal of diplomatic experience, and to this day can be commended for maintaining the fractious Arab and Middle-Eastern states in the Gulf War Coalition during the long build-up to the anticlimactic conflict with Saddam Hussein. However, Cheney's foreign policy priorities will likely concern his European allies. Members of NATO are concerned about the anticipated U.S. pullback from peacekeeping activities and the proposal to pursue a missile defense program, and Cheney is likely to have his hands full placating them.

Secretary Powell has many attributes that could lend themselves to his new position. But General Powell's main focus is likely to concern traditional issues of U.S. national security. Moreover, he has no experience in Latin American affairs, not to mention any notable dealings with Mexico. He is likely to concentrate his efforts on engaging or containing China, handling Russia and perhaps pursuing peace in the Middle East.

Furthermore, the so-called Powell Doctrine, which dictates that the national interests of the United States will take precedent over any policy undertaken for more global ideals, lends itself to a belief that interaction with Latin America will concern only items negatively impacting the United States. These items include action against the drug trade, curbing illegal immigration, and support for Plan Colombia. Plan Colombia, a US$1.3-million military aid program created under the Clinton administration, has already placed 300 U.S. military personnel in the country and is responsible for increasing tensions in the Andean region. Colombia's neighbors fear that increased sparring with the left-wing FARC rebels could cause the conflict to spread beyond the country's borders.

It is interesting to note that Powell had nothing to say about Bush's first foreign policy initiative, the restriction of international family planning funds, which arguably falls into the "global ideals" camp.

Condoleezza Rice, Bush's Foreign Policy Advisor, hardly has better Latin American credentials than Powell. She built a name for herself as a key adviser to President Bush Sr. as director of Soviet and East European affairs at the National Security Council. Her main focus is thus likely to be U.S. policy toward Russia and the Balkans, which, if she follows the Powell Doctrine, is apt to be aimed toward reducing and even eliminating U.S. involvement in these matters.

There are, however, two appointments that should give Latin American leaders hope. The first of these is Paul O'Neill, the former Alcoa CEO who is taking over as Treasury Secretary. The second is Robert Zoellick whose confirmation as chief U.S. Trade Representative was confirmed in early February.

During his confirmation hearings, O'Neill was asked to revisit the action of former Secretary Robert Rubin during the 1994-1995 Mexican peso crisis, when the United States and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) led the formation of a US$50-billion aid package. At that time, Rubin tapped the U.S. emergency currency defense fund--created to support the dollar in times of crisis--to add funds to the Mexican aid package. From the U.S. point of view, the move was one of the most controversial in the crisis. O'Neill said that Rubin's handling of it was, "right in retrospect," no doubt to the delight of the new Mexican administration.

"I hope when 'my Mexico' occurs, you will give me enough free-board to do the things that seem necessary to do," he told senators on the confirmation committee.

While Mexico does not seem likely to require that sort of aid at present, knowing that the U.S. Treasury is potentially predisposed to assist (given the correct circumstances) is a positive sign to Latin American countries in economic stress, such as Argentina. Furthermore, it could spell more confidence among international markets as to Latin America's general stability.

Zoellick is a zealous free-trader, a veteran of two Republican administrations and was active both in the creation of the World Trade Organization and Nafta. He was often critical of Clinton administration policies, saying they did not constitute coherent international trade strategies, but rather were dictated by domestic political concerns.

Yet, even with these two nominations, the Bush team is still wanting.

"With the exception of Zoellick, the Cabinet has no Latin American experience," says Eric Olson of the Washington Office on Latin America, a progressive policy studies institute. "He has not appointed the kind of people who will make it a priority."

So how will Bush act toward Latin America and will he make the region a priority? For the answer, his record as Texas Governor provides some insight.

PAST IS PROLOGUE

George Bush's foreign policy experience is mostly limited to his experience as governor of Texas and, by extension, to Mexico. Given the limited power of the governor's office in that state, it is difficult to say definitively whether then-Governor Bush had a significant impact upon the bilateral relationship.

There were several good reasons for Bush to work on the relationship. Mexico is key to Texas' export economy. The lion's share of Texas exports go south, to the tune of US$41.4 billion in 1999, according to data from the Massachusetts Institute for Social and Economic Research (MISER). This figure was 45.5% of total Texas exports and was 14% larger than in 1998. The main export industries are those Texas has been working hard to cultivate: electronic equipment, industrial machinery and transportation equipment.

Add to this the fact that the Texas border is a major point of traffic and commerce between the two nations. Texas leads in immigration from Mexico, both legal and illegal. Cross-border drug trafficking is a persistent problem, as are a wide variety of bilateral environmental concerns. These make Mexico a major focus for any Texas governor.

But Governor Bush earned accolades for his personal relationships with his counterparts in the northern Mexico states and his effort to build a dialogue with former President Ernesto Zedillo, especially given the actions of his peers within the United States.

"He [Governor Bush] built a better relationship with Mexico than Pete Wilson did," says Mary Kelly of the Texas Center for Policy Studies, referring to the former California governor's support of that state's Proposition 187--a measure to curb illegal immigration and remove government support of illegal immigrants living in California.

"Bush was not bent toward skapegoating [Mexico], and his rhetoric differed from that of his party."

But Governor Bush did not spend his governorship acquiescing to Mexican concerns. On both environmental issues and immigration, he clashed with the northern Mexican state governors and even ignored them. Over the impending execution of a Mexican national in Texas and the protests from his counterparts in Mexico, Bush said very little and allowed the execution to proceed.

"There were issues upon which Bush avoided confrontation with Mexico and attempted to maintain a cordial relationship by not drawing attention to certain issues," says Professor Anthony Knopp of the University of Texas. This approach, however, is unlikely to work so well in his current position as president.

ON THE PLATE

Bush's recent trip to Mexico and this April's Summit of the Americas in Quebec are two events forcing Latin policy issues to the top of Bush's agenda.

Judging by his visit to President Vicente Fox's ranch in Guanajuato, Mexico, the Bush administration is evidently keen to take U.S.-Mexico relations to a new level, by committing to ground-breaking measures on immigration, trade and energy (see Close Up p.15).

However, many regard the same-day U.S. attack on Iraqi positions as a clear indication that Bush will not allow his new focus on Latin America to overshadow U.S. global interests.

Armand Peschard-Sverdrup, Director of the Mexico Project at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, is optimistic that Mexican and Latin American issues will not be shelved the way they were by the Clinton administration after the 1994 Summit of the Americas in Miami.

"Bush is still trying to find the foreign offices and looking for the keys," he says. "But there is less potential for Latin issues to fizzle."

For the first time since the drug certification process was instituted, the United States may have a president interested in changing it, says Eric Olson.

"Fox wants a change in that process and now has both a receptive U.S. president and Senate," he says. "Bush has a real desire to make the [U.S.-Mexico] relationship more cooperative."

In all likelihood, and to nobody's surprise, the major issues facing Bush from Mexico and Latin America will concern trade and economy. Bush has a history of promoting trade with Mexico, and his trade representative is dedicated to free trade. But here Bush and Fox may in fact collide. Some analysts claim Mexico has a vested interest in stalling the implementation of the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA), which will be at the top of the agenda in Quebec, as it would remove Mexico's unique access to the United States. It will be interesting to see how Bush handles himself when Fox raises the subject.

Michael Kleinberg is a former Mexico City-based reporter and freelance writer. He is currently an associate in the Latin American and European departments of a Denver-based investment bank specializing in the telecommunications and media industries.