WITH ANTI-DRUG SUMMIT, THE MESSAGE MATTERS

The seven-nation drug summit, whose formal sessions begin today in San Antonio, has come under fire in some quarters for being high-profile posturing at a time when narcotic battles are being lost. We disagree with the criticism. Instead, we believe the convergence of leaders from this hemisphere for a discussion on combating drugs may be the most cost-effective strategy employed in this struggle. The accords that can be strengthened at such a summit, and the visibility that can be given to the problem, are invaluable.

At San Antonio, American President George Bush and leaders of Colombia, Bolivia and Peru will follow up on the blueprint for cooperation they drafted at the Andean Drug Summit in 1990. Joining this year's gathering will be leaders from Mexico, Ecuador and Venezuela, nations that have since signed on to the inter-American drug fight. Critics say the strategies have failed and the "show" in San Antonio is fraudulent. A Democratic congressman issued a report this week saying the tide of cocaine flowing into the United States has not been stemmed. "There is no evidence that a single street dealer has missed a single sale," the report insists.

What message do we take from that quit trying? The notion is absurd. Especially not now, when there are signs of progress. Drug interdictions are on the increase and adolescent cocaine use is reportedly down 60 percent, according to the White House. When this same summit was held in Colombia two years ago, members of the Medellin cocaine cartel were thought to be untouchable; today, its leaders are either dead or in jail.

While drug-fighting efforts are succeeding in some quarters, there are no encouraging signs of shrinkage among hard-core users. In addition, drug-related violence in America seems to be on the rise. Can these offenders be reached? Maybe a tightening of the cocaine supply will only increase the violence, boost the toll this habit exacts on American families. There will be losses, but joining the battle will result in fewer casualties than not fighting.

An assistant secretary of state responsible for Latin American affairs made an interesting comparison, perhaps inadvertently, in saying the war on drugs would not be won in the same way as a Persian Gulf, with a brief, intense foray. Rather, it is a painstaking commitment. In this apples-and-oranges comparison, we must still covet the idea of the nation mobilizing its support for the war on drugs in effect, one being fought on our shores the way it did with the effort to free Kuwait.

In some ways, we believe this is happening. American schools, along with parent groups, have taken a lead in teaching young people about the dangers of drug abuse. Athletes and other role models are lending their voice to the cause in greater numbers. State governments are pitching in with programs designed to eradicate as well as educate.

George Bush and his counterparts are sending an important signal with their summit gathering this week. They're saying that the fight against drugs will not go away. The message matters.