BY NANCY SAN MARTIN

  Latin American countries are leading an effort to censure Cuba before the U.N. Human Rights Commission today, a vote that, if approved, would underline
  the increasing diplomatic isolation of the government of Fidel Castro in the Western Hemisphere.

  For the first time, the effort has the support of at least a dozen Latin American nations, including Mexico, which has a long history of support for Cuba.

  In addition, the anticipated move would -- for the first time -- happen without the weight of a U.S. vote. U.S. diplomats have actively sought to round up
  votes against Cuba, however, even though the United States lost its seat on the commission last year.

  ''The moral weight of the hemisphere is making itself felt,'' said Delal Baer of the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a moderately conservative
  think tank.

  ''Will it bring [Castro] down? Probably not,'' she said. ``Will it bring hope and embolden the Cuban people? Maybe.''

  Instead of an outright condemnation of Cuba's human rights record -- the customary tactic -- the Latin American initiative calls on Cuba to agree to an
  inspection by a representative of the U.N. High Commissioner, a recommendation the Cuban government already has rebuffed.

  For decades, Mexico has consistently ignored U.S. pressure to turn its back on Cuba, maintaining normal diplomatic relations for an unbroken period since
  Castro's rise to power in 1959.

  Mexico has abstained 10 times and voted twice against similar resolutions, in 1990 and again in 1999. In 1989, Mexico voted with the majority in a 32-1
  vote accepted by Cuba that called for cooperation in examining questions over human rights concerns. The resolution was far weaker than the original,
  U.S.-backed motion.

  SOME DISSENT

  The vote has been met with dissent in several countries. Critics in Mexico and Guatemala, for example, have accused their governments of being U.S.
  puppets.

  Mexican President Vicente Fox has brushed off those claims, saying that the wording of the resolution was the determining factor. While the resolution
  scolds Cuba for its poor human rights records, it also suggests failure on the part of the U.S. embargo, which Mexico does not support.

  ''It has to do with the fact that the text in the resolution is compatible with what Mexico has always supported,'' said Miguel Monterrubio, spokesman for
  the Mexican Embassy in Washington.

  ``It is precise and constructive. It requests rather than condemns.''

  The resolution contains relatively mild language that explicitly recognizes Cuba's efforts in fulfilling the ''social rights'' of its citizens. It also makes a
  disparaging, albeit indirect, reference to the U.S. embargo by stating that these accomplishments have been made ``despite an adverse international
  environment.''

  However, the resolution urges Havana to make similar efforts in human, civil and political rights.

  LARGELY SYMBOLIC

  What has most enraged Cuba and invigorated supporters of the resolution is the part asking the commission to send a representative to Havana to
  monitor the application of the resolution.

  While everyone agrees passage of the resolution would be largely symbolic, it places Cuba in an uncomfortable position. If the government shuns the
  request to allow a U.N. observer into the country, as it already has indicated, it risks offending regional neighbors.

  James Carragher, coordinator for Cuban affairs for the Department of State, acknowledged that the measure does not fully satisfy U.S. concerns. But
  even without a vote this year, the U.S. delegation has decided to attach its name to the resolution.

  THE POSITIVES

  ''There are things in it that we are not enthralled with,'' Carragher said. ``Despite that, and the reason we're co-sponsoring it, is because the positives
  far outweigh the negatives. The powerful part of it is that it presents a unified voice.''

  Last year's vote, sponsored by the Czech Republic, narrowly passed by a 22-20 vote. A wider margin is expected with this year's resolution sponsored by
  Uruguay.

  29 CO-SPONSORS

  There are 29 co-sponsors so far, including 10 from Latin America -- five of which are voting members.

  ''This is a resolution that any democratic government would be honored to sponsor,'' Uruguayan President Jorge Batlle Ibáñez recently told the Herald.

  Havana has lashed out against the resolution, calling it ''a fabrication'' conspired by the Bush administration. The Cuban government also has accused
  Uruguay and the other countries backing the resolution of ''genuflecting'' to the United States.

  Cuban Foreign Minister Felipe Pérez Roque described the Rights Commission as ``a battle field divided in two . . . on one side, judges who want to
  impose their concept of the world and, on the other, victims.''

  He said that the resolution seeks ``to create a mechanism to monitor Cuba and keep it on the Commission agenda next year with the sole objective of
  enabling the United States to justify the embargo.''

  ILLUSIONS

  ''They're having vain illusions if they think that Cuba would let an inspector in the service of the United States government come here, under these
  conditions,'' Perez Roque said.

  Carragher denied Roque's accusations.

  ''We certainly have had discussions with many countries on the commission but I would simply characterize them as exchange of views, exchange of
  information,'' he said.

  If Latin America votes as a solid block, ''that really would be a slap in the face of Cuba,'' said Joaquín Roy, a professor of international studies at the
  University of Miami and director of the European Union Center.

  ``But, then again, the cost of slapping Cuba at the United Nations, maybe some years ago, there was a cost. Now, what do they have to lose?''

  ''This is a yearly exercise,'' Roy said. ``In the fall, the whole planet slaps the United States for imposing the embargo. In the spring, a substantial number
  of members slaps Cuba on human rights.''

  ``The point of view depends on how the math on the votes are interpreted.''

  Herald staff writer Andres Oppenheimer contributed to this report.