MEXICO CITY: President Vicente Fox is in a squeeze. He has to mollify domestic opinion, which is solidly antiwar, as well as the expectations of his northern neighbour, which feels Mexico should be on its side in the upcoming UN vote authorizing the disarmament of Iraq.

Whether he can satisfy Mexican constituents — who go to the polls in July in all-important midterm elections — without further damaging the already fragile US-Mexican relationship remains to be seen. Fox could end up paying a price no matter how Mexico votes, analysts say.

As a non-permanent member of the UN Security Council, Mexico wields a crucial vote on the upcoming resolution. Until recent days, Fox appeared to stake out Mexico’s position as above all one of peace. He said he favoured a deliberate and reasoned UN plan of disarming Iraq rather than a pre-emptive US-led attack.

But in recent addresses, Fox has hardened his language on Iraq, a shift that one analyst described as “painting himself out of a corner,” of giving himself a possible exit from previous declarations that appeared to put him at loggerheads with the US position.

In a speech on Friday in which he warned that war could be just days or weeks away, Fox used uncharacteristically harsh language to refer to President Saddam Hussein as a “tyrant,” adding that disarming him is “the only way to secure the peace.”

Fox has still not said how Mexico will vote. But analysts say the president is weighing the consequences of voting on an issue that its neighbour sees as crucial to its security.

“He has changed at least in that he has realized that it does him no good to appear to have made a decision to oppose a US resolution when in fact he has not taken it,” said Rafael Fernandez de Castro, a professor at Mexico City’s Autonomous Technological Institute.

Economist Rogelio Ramirez de la O says Fox could pay a heavy price in opposing a US-backed resolution. Mexico could see a backlash, for instance, in reduced foreign investment and tourism. Corporate and labour union indignation could reverse the enormous trade gains that Mexico has made since the inauguration of the North American Free Trade Agreement more than nine years ago.

“If the wave of nationalism widens in the US as a result of another terrorist attack or higher casualties than expected in Iraq, then Mexican products could suffer. Tourism especially could be affected right away if Mexico is perceived as a country not in agreement with America on security issues,” Ramirez de la O said.

The last decade has seen a tremendous boom in Mexican trade with the US, totalling $232.2 billion last year, almost three times the $81.5 billion in 1993, the last year before NAFTA took effect. Best of all, Mexico is running a $37.2 billion trade surplus, compared with a $1.6 billion deficit in 1993.

The United States’ sense of entitlement to Mexican support is also heightened by the fact that it granted Mexico a $20-billion loan during this country’s 1995 fiscal crisis, helping it avoid economic implosion.

Meanwhile, Fox badly needs to score gains for his National Action Party, or PAN, in elections July 6. The PAN’s minority status in Congress and Fox’s legislative missteps have caused the ambitious slate of reforms he campaigned on to founder. All 500 federal deputies are up for election in July. An earlier test of his popularity will take place on March 9, when more than 124 mayors will be elected in the affluent state of Mexico that surrounds the capital.

By appearing to cave in to US pressure to support its UN resolution, Fox might alienate Mexican voters who oppose a war on Iraq, and cost him dearly at the polls, said David Shirk, a political scientist and Mexico specialist at the University of California, San Diego’s Center for US-Mexican Studies.

“What’s more important to Fox at this particular time is not the US relationship, which is already pretty bad, but maintaining his autonomy and winning enough seats in Congress to make it at least friendlier for the PAN, if not majority-controlled,” Shirk said.

“The real danger for him is doing something unpopular that could cost him critical points and contribute to long-standing anti-American nationalist sentiments in Mexico,” Shirk said.

US-Mexico relations have chilled since the Sept 11 attacks. Fox has been disappointed by a shift in the US focus away from Mexico and toward its war on terror.

“The US forgot Mexico existed after Sept 11, and now they need us,” Fernandez de Castro said. “Then Fox painted himself into a corner on the Iraq resolution, and now he is trying to buy time.” —Dawn/LAT-WP News Service (c) Los Angeles Times