New York Times
An international treaty, signed and ratified by the United States, guarantees everyone arrested by a foreign government the right to seek help from the consular post of his own country. Yet Javier Suárez Medina, a Mexican national who killed an undercover policeman during a drug deal in 1988, was never told of this right -- even though, Mexican officials say, he was carrying a green card. The officials say Mexico's consular office was repeatedly told that Mr. Suárez was not Mexican.
On Wednesday, Texas executed Mr. Suárez despite numerous international protests. Vicente Fox, the Mexican president, canceled a trip to Texas later this month. For American citizens, the consequences could come when Washington seeks to help Americans arrested overseas.
Mexico argues that if the consulate had been allowed to help Mr. Suárez, he would have had a better lawyer, which might have won him life in prison instead of the death penalty. ...
Washington's dismissal of Mr. Fox has damaged the standing of the most pro-American Mexican president ever and left many Mexicans wondering whether their country is getting enough in return for their president's support of Washington.
Americans get arrested by foreign governments all the time on charges of murder, theft, drug offenses and other ordinary crimes, often in nations where the justice system falls quite a bit short of perfection. To protect their rights, they need help from the American consulate. By executing foreign nationals denied access to consular services, the administration is handing other countries a justification to deny access to Americans.
Washington Post
One unexpected casualty of the Sept. 11 attacks has been U.S.-Mexican relations. A year ago, President Bush and President Vicente Fox were best buddies, and the two countries were committed to finding better ways to manage the issues of immigration and imported labor. Now the Bush administration is focused on other issues, and the impetus toward more open borders is ancient history. Many Mexicans feel that issues important to them are being neglected.
Into this thorny situation has now stepped the busy Texas executioner. With Mr. Fox scheduled to visit the state this week, with a stop at Mr. Bush's Crawford ranch, Texas rubbed salt in the wound by executing a Mexican, Javier Suarez Medina. Mexico has no death penalty, and Mr. Fox appealed for clemency; Texas Gov. Rick Perry spurned his appeals, and the State Department declined to intervene. So Mr. Fox canceled the trip, as he put it, "in contempt of the execution."
But nothing comes between the Lone Star State and its needle. And President Bush, a loyal son of Texas, has never shown anything but enthusiasm for his home state's addiction. So while a normal state might have forgone the execution out of deference to the sensibilities of its guest and his constituency -- as Missouri did during the visit of Pope John Paul II, for example -- Texas moved ahead. Even supporters of the death penalty ought to wonder why killing Mr. Suarez is worth further irritating already complicated relations with the country on our southern border.
The Boston Globe
The plight of Afghan refugees has been obscured by a focus on conflicts within Afghanistan. Now that military forces have effectively dismantled Taliban rule, Washington ought to cast its gaze toward the safety of the millions of Afghan refugees who fled the violence and work to secure repatriation for those who wish to return.
More than two decades of violence in Afghanistan -- from the Soviet invasion of 1979 through civil war to the recent US military action -- have resulted in the flight of millions to neighboring countries. The United Nations refugee agency, the UNHCR, estimates that as of February 2002, 3.5 million Afghans had fled to Iran and Pakistan.
Now refugees are returning to Afghanistan at record rates -- more than 1.5 million in the last five months, according to the UN. The end of Taliban rule and poor living conditions in refugee camps have propelled the returns. Last week Iran set a deadline of Aug. 27 for the expulsion of some 250,000 additional refugees who did not officially register as immigrants with Iran.
But the refugees, often poor and jobless, return to a bleak picture. ...
Given the toll US military action has had on Afghanistan's physical landscape, the US government must devote further resources to Afghan refugees by assisting the UNHCR. The task at hand is to ensure safe refugee camps in Pakistan and Iran while helping in the transition home of voluntary returnees. US responsibility in Afghanistan does not end with government rebuilding. The safety and well-being of all Afghans is essential to the political stability of Afghanistan.
Dallas Morning News
Rome faces a decision. And the Vatican surely must understand its importance.
Pope John Paul II upholds the one-strike rule that U.S. bishops adopted in June in Dallas toward clerical sex abusers, and which the leaders of U.S. Catholic orders agreed to voluntarily follow during a meeting in Philadelphia last Saturday. Or the charismatic, popular pope risks creating a sense of betrayal within the American Catholic laity.
Of course, some bishops protested the one-strike rule during their Dallas meeting. They argued that priests deserve a chance at rehabilitation, and should not necessarily be dismissed. That view also was alive and well during the meeting of leaders of U.S. religious orders last week.
Rome knows all this, of course. And some speculate that the Vatican may side with the bishops who want leniency for priests, even though Pope John Paul II spoke forcefully against sexual abuse this spring.
It is good that the pope spoke out on the problem because, sad to say, the abuses by priests are not isolated to a few dioceses or orders. Sexual abuse has become widespread across the U.S. Catholic Church. Because of charges against them, almost 300 U.S. priests and four bishops have departed the ministry this year alone.
The Vatican must follow through on the pope's words and firmly embrace zero tolerance of abusive priests. Many lives already have been tragically harmed. And the faith of some has been sharply challenged. ...
Human nature may lead some bishops to protect their associates. We understand that. But sexual abuse is sexual abuse. And it should not be tolerated, especially in the nation's leading religious institution.
As important as the priesthood is to the Catholic faith, the laity also is crucial. And it is their lives and beliefs that have been challenged. The Vatican must take them into account and take a strong stand against the abuse that threatens to tear apart their wonderful, historic church.
(Compiled by United Press International)
