International Cooperation · 3.2 Collaboration with International Organizations

Fully meets the criterion.

Mexico has verifiable evidence of engagement with regional and international organizations specialized in drug policy. The OAS/CICAD source establishes Mexico’s institutional presence within the specialized inter-American mechanism, demonstrating formal participation in the hemisphere’s main regional space for cooperation, evaluation, and technical dialogue on drugs.

The block also documents Mexico’s participation in CICAD’s Multilateral Evaluation Mechanism. Although the available MEM report is old and should not be treated as the main evidence for the recent period, it provides institutional traceability of the Mexico-CICAD relationship and shows that Mexico has been subject to regional evaluation on drug control.

The strongest evidence comes from COPOLAD III. Mexico’s country results page establishes operational international cooperation directly connected to drug policy: support for the National Addiction Prevention Strategy Juntos por la Paz, strengthening of the Mexican Observatory on Mental Health and Addictions, demand reduction, responses to methamphetamine and fentanyl, technical guidelines, tools, and professional training. This source demonstrates practical engagement, not merely nominal participation.

The EUDA/COPOLAD source complements the block by validating the architecture of the bi-regional programme between the European Union, Latin America, and the Caribbean, and by placing Mexico within that technical and policy-cooperation framework. Its function is contextual and institutionally corroborative; the strongest Mexico-specific evidence remains the COPOLAD country results page.

The territorial review is correctly delimited as not applicable. Mexico City, Puebla, Oaxaca, Chiapas, and the complementary states cannot establish or replace Mexico’s international engagement, because this falls under federal foreign policy, national representation, and international cooperation of the Mexican State.

The national gap does not block full compliance. No consolidated independent evaluation was located on intensity, continuity, leadership, MEM recommendation compliance, negotiating influence, domestic outcomes, or RC2 impact during 2024-2026. However, the available evidence does establish institutional engagement and specific operational cooperation with OAS/CICAD and COPOLAD/EUDA. Under RC2 criteria, that is sufficient for full compliance with the indicator.