by the El Reportero’s news services

In mid-January relations between Ecuador and Colombia entered what seemed like a phase of renewed acrimony, as Bogotá reacted to new Ecuadorean immigration controls calling them ‘discriminatory [and] maybe even xenophobic.’ However, at the same time, both governments were taking steps in other areas which suggested a more conciliatory approach; Ecuador explicitly stated that its security buildup in the border area was intended to eliminate the presence of the Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia (Farc) guerrillas while Colombia announced the establishment along the border of a large military presence of its own.

Freed hostage accuses Farc of massacre

On 5 February Sigifredo López, the last of the politicians held by the Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia (Farc), was released. López immediately accused the Farc of killing in 2007 the other 11 politicians who were kidnapped with him in 2002.

The government of President Alvaro Uribe has always argued that the Farc killed the state politicians on 18 June 2007. López, though not an eye-witness, endorses the government’s version, and his evidence, though not conclusive, is convincing. López suggests that the Farc killed the deputies by mistake when one Farc group mistook another for a government (or mercenary) rescue attempt to free the hostages.

Brazil still loves Lula, but Serra is president in waiting

President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva’s popularity remains unassailable. In fact, according to the latest (January 2009) CNT/Sensus opinion poll, the most widely cited barometer of the prevailing public mood in the country, Brazilians take comfort from his sunny disposition and his resolute confi dence in the face of the current economic downturn, which is threatening jobs and household incomes this year.

The president’s approval rating reached a new record-breaking 84 percent in January, up from 80.3 percent in Dece­mber 2008, while the government’s approval rating was 72.5 percent, up from 71.1 percent previously. Frustratingly for Lula and his ruling centreleft Partido dos Trabalhadores (PT), however, the main centre-right oppostion candidate, São Paulo state governor José Serra, of the Partido da Social Democracia Brasileira (PSDB), remains the firm favourite to replace Lula in the next presidential election in 2010.

by José de la Isla

HOUSTON – The Republican National Hispanic Assembly will lead what it describes as a “fresh dialogue to recapture its competitiveness’’ in winning the Hispanic vote at a two-hour forum and “frank discussion” in Washington, D.C. Nov 19.

“The Republican Party cannot hope to regain a governor majority or win national elections without significantly improving its results among Hispanic voters,” warned the RNHA in announcing the $50 breakfast event cosponsored by the Hispanic Leadership Fund and Americans for Tax Reform.

Among senior party leaders listed as participants along with RNHA President Danny Vargas.’ is Michael Steele’ newly elected president of the Republican National Committee.

Following the election of Steele to that leadership post, GOP activist Leslie Sánchez pondered whether the two political parties will be able to look beyond the stereotypes of Latinos as they vie to attract them. Last year Sánchez authored “Los Republicanos: Why Hispanics and Republicans Need Each Other,” a book that drew media attention but apparently changed few minds within the party.

Her question is elemental Hispanics, stereotypes aside, can be rich and poor, entrepreneurial and the jobless, colonial pioneers and yesterday’s arrivals. Willingness to hold together as a community is a strength that registered in last November’s presidential election.

Despite some claims to the contrary, the historical truth is Hispanics align roughly two-thirds Democratic and one-third Republican There are exceptions, of course, and John McCain’s 31 percent of the Latino vote in November was close to the mark.

Sánchez recognizes Republicans must win at least 35°/0 of the Hispanic vote to remain viable in future presidential races. Like many Republicans since the 1970s, she concentrates on the affinity with entrepreneurs, the middle class, and the upwardly mobile as the best recruits.

The problem with classism like that is it drives a wedge among Latinos as a community of interests.

This approach was most recently rejected as Latinos of differing income levels and professional strata were slapped in the face with the reality that hateful anti-immigrant talk really does brush-paint their own families. Many who thought they were accepted into the middle- and upper-class milieu discovered they were still perceived as oUtsiders.

Brought into question is whether it’s possible to be a respectable Republican and a Latino as well.

By allowing anti-immigrant radicals to run amok, divide-and-conquer class politics is played out while the party preaches there is room for everybody. Lost are the shared interests of fair chance, good schools, democratic representation and the like. No party has a patent on such values.

The challenge before Chairman Steele isn’t how to entice a Latino constituency to the existing Republican Party but how to prove to Hispanics the party is capable of change and worthy of their participation. vVhere will the next generation of moderate, sensible GOP candidates come from, those who know better than to shoot the chef when they are hungry.

It’s worth remembering that a good many Republican and independent voters helped throw out a lot of the incumbents in 2006 and 2008 who joined Tom Tancredo’s inquisitions.

That should have sent the leadership a clear message: too many Republican candidates, even those wearing sheep’s clothing, scared Hispanic and non-Hispanic voters as well with their endorsements of hateful policies.

It concerned our national morality Bullying immigrants was the wrong response to the problem.

The Republican dilemma is that without Latinos, the party doesn’t stand a chance in any near-term presidential election, and it will increasingly lose statewide races in new Democratic territory such as Nevada, New Mexico, Florida, Virginia and North Carolina. The usual Republican electorate is not growing, while the Latino population is.

Chairman Steele could start with a culture cleansing. Just as Bill Clinton’s New Democratic politics stole pages from the Republican play book, so can Chairman Steele steal one from him.

He could begin by apologizing. The party has become morally lax. It has compromised the nation’s values by proposing preposterous ­policies and promoted tired stereotypes It ain’t much—not nearly enough—but letting the putrid fumes out of the room is a start. Hispanic Link.

by the University of Michigan

ANN ARBOR, Michigan.— Environmental conditions are much more powerful than genetic influences in determining intelligence, according to University of Michigan social psychologist Richard E. Nisbett.

Nisbett is the author of “Intelligence and How to Get It: Why Schools and Cultures Count,” to be published Feb. 2, 2009, by W. W. Norton & Company, Inc.

According to Nisbett, recent research in psychology, genetics, and neuroscience, and new studies on the effectiveness of educational interventions, have shown that intelligence is strongly affected by environmental factors that have nothing to do with genes. In the book, Nisbett analyzes a large number of such studies, showing how environment influences not just IQ as measured by standardized tests but also actual achievement.

“Believing that intelligence is under your control – and having parents who demand achievement – can do wonders,” Nisbett writes.

For example, the high academic and occupational attainment of Asians and Jews is not due to higher IQs, but to family values that emphasize accomplishment and intellectual attainment, and to cultures that emphasize hard work and persistence.

Likewise, Nisbett points out, genes play no role in race differences in IQ between Blacks and Caucasians. Class and race differences starting in early infancy combine with neighborhood, cultural, and educational differences that widen this gap.

“We need intensive early childhood education for the poor, and home visits to teach parents how to encourage intellectual development,” Nisbett writes.

“Such efforts can produce huge immediate gains in IQ and enormous long-term gains in academic achievement and occupational attainment. Highly ambitious elementary, junior high, and high school programs can also produce massive gains in academic achievement.

And a variety of simple, ­cost-free interventions, including, most notably, simply convincing students that their intelligence is under their control to a substantial extent, can make a big difference to academic achievement.”

The U.S. has fallen behind most of the developed world in its level of educational achievement, Nisbett points out, attributing this deficit to the large and widening gaps between socioeconomic classes in this country.Being poor is linked with many environmental factors of a biological and social nature that lower IQ and acedmic achievement.

These factors include poor nutrition, inferior medical care, a low rate of breastfeeding and parenting styles that are much less warm and supportive than those of higher socioeconomic status parents. Not only are many U.S. Blacks affl icted with these problems, he points out, they also struggle with stereotypes and prejudice that intensify decreases in performance.

Nisbett singles out several educational intervention programs that have been shown to be effective in closing the racial and socioeconomic gap in school achievement. He also debunks the claims of success in other programs and techniques, including the No Child Left Behind Act.

­by José de la Isla

A group of anti-immigrant activists protest against undocumented immigration. (photo by Intellingence Report)

A new book of essays edited by Clintonera HUD secretary and former San Antonio Mayor Henry Cisneros,calls attention to the close tie between the nation’s future growth and that of the Latino community.

“Latinos and the Nation’s Future,” published by Arte Público Press, was released Jan. 26 in Washington, D.C. at the American Progress Center, a think-tank closely associated with the Obama administration.

Its 16 chapters are written by 17 renowned authorities in their respective fields. Four sections, comprising 248 pages (including extensive statistical tables in one appendix), cover perspectives of the past and present, the larger society, statistical interpretations, and interpretations by MacArthur fellow Ernesto Cortés and Nicolás Kanellos about what it all means.

“The answer (to Latino progress) lies in the extent and rapidity of investment in education and in the Latino progression to the middle class,” says Cisneros in his overview essay.

The tenuousness about the progression is best illustrated by Janet Murguía’s generalizations in the forward. She recognizes immigrants are assimilating well but that Latinos as a group are below par on educational achievement, they work for low wages often in dead-end jobs, but are demographically growing exponentially and “put our entire country’s future at risk” when progress does not come fast enough. Yet she acknowledges Latinos “have the raw materials of our immigrant ancestors.”

Immigration issues and concerns, it’s true, have stolen the show for the past two decades, old complaints in the present color a lot of the thinking in many of the essays, and discussion is thin on mid-course corrections to form the idealized future that’s envisioned.

Raúl Yzaguirre, the former executive director of the National Council of La Raza, writes an exceptional essay on civil rights (a story all citizens should know) and Tamar Jacoby should probably serve as the last word on immigrants and newcomers and the emerging new nation. With award winning scholar and publisher Nicolás Kanellos, the background chapters are among the strongest in the volume. Although having many insights and strong qualities, the overall impression is that of shock and awe.

Essay contributors seem to assume that a national Latino presence comes as a shock to readers, that a quarter of the U.S. population will be Latino at mid-century (or hybrid progeny from intermarriage), that political representation will increase (Lionel Sosa), that education is a key focus (Sarita Brown)— as it has been for three centuries — and that the immigration demonstrations of 2006 were the largest since the Civil Right Movement of the 1960s (Joe García).

The awe is that Latinos now count in every step of the way toward forging what the nation becomes next (Roberto Suro and Leobardo Estrada).

The quaint twentieth century terms and concepts of “assimilation” and “integration” ­are applied liberally to refer to the process of a new consensus.

The resulting vision, posited by Kanellos, is that of a future United States that is more fully integrated into the economies and workings of this continent—more so than other global extensions.

Hispanics become more “mainstream,” corporate interests extend to Hispanic and hemispheric markets, and Latinos are in leadership positions in all aspects of national life.

A transnational identity arises and the future, according to this perspective, is like the present only more Latino. Hispanic Link.

­

by the El Reportero’s news services

On Feb. 1, the Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia (FARC) released four hostages to opposition senator Piedad Córdoba and a commission of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC).

Later the same day, a car bomb in the south-western city of Cali killed two people and injured at least 17. President Alvaro Uribe’s response to the blast was uncompromising: he has prohibited Córdoba, the FARC’s main point of contact, from participating in the release of the group’s last two civilian hostages, planned for today (Feb. 2) and Wednesday (Feb. 4).

Uribe is determined to prevent the battered group from using hostage releases to regain political leverage, and is sending a clear message that his government will not bend to pressure from renewed terrorist attacks.

His decision may, however, prove unpopular: it is not yet clear as to whether the FARC will cooperate without Córdoba, thus the release process has been thrown temporarily into limbo.

Ailing Castro throws first punch at Obama

HAVANA – Fidel Castro on Thursday threw his first punch at President Barack Obama after several weeks of praise for the new leader, demanding the U.S. return Guantanamo Bay military base to Cuba and criticizing the U.S. defense of Israel. Castro’s latest essay, published on an official Web site, came one week after he called Obama “intelligent and noble” and said he would cut back on his writings to prevent interfering with Cuban government decisions.

The missive Thursday raised new questions about what role he maintains in policy making, especially coming while his brother, President Raul Castro, was in Moscow on an official visit.

The ailing 82-year-old 1former president wrote that if the U.S. doesn’t give the U.S. base at Guantanamo back to Cuba, it will be a violation of international law and an abuse of American ­power against a small country.

The U.S. president must “respect this norm without any condition,” Castro wrote.

The U.S., which acquired Guantanamo more than 100 years ago, considers it strategically important to maintain. The treaty granting its use remains in effect unless both Cuba and the U.S. abrogate it or the U.S. abandons the base.

In his Thursday essay, Castro also criticized Obama for backing Israel’s defense against attacks by Palestinian militants. He said it demonstrated “the abusive character of the empire’s power” and insisted it would contribute to “the genocide against the Palestinians.”

(Latin Briefs and Associated Press contributed to this report).

by Jacqueline Baylón

The California-based National Hispanic Media Coalition came to the nation’s capital Jan. 28 to deliver a petition for inquiry on hate speech in the media to the Federal Communications Commission.

Hate crimes against Hispanics have increased by 40 percent in the last four years, FBI data shows. Joined by representatives from five partnering organizations, president Alex Nogales first shared the NHMC’s concerns and strategies to attack what he defined as “a huge and growing national problem” during a morning news conference at the National Press Club.

“This is the kind of stuff that is going on the radio, that is going on the television, day in and day out,” said Nogales, whose group has been researching the subject for two years. “When we go to the internet, things are even worse.”

Accompanying him was Francisco Javier Iribarren, assistant director of the University of California at Los Angeles’ Chicano Studies Research Center, which conducted a pilot study to quantify hate speech in commercial talk radio.

From the study came a sound, “replicable methodology that could be used to establish the nature and extent of hate speech,” Iribarren said.

Georgetown University Law Center attorney Jessica González, who delivered the petition to the FCC that afternoon, explained, “It will not ask for regulation.

Rather, it will seek an examination into the extent and nature of hate speech in our media and options for counteracting its effects.”

Hate speech has been a factor in crimes against Hispanics, Nogales stated.

While calling on the FCC to take a fresh look at the issue, NHMC is requesting that the Secretary of Commerce, or in the alternative, Congress, direct the National Telecommunications and Information Administration to follow up on its 1993 report, “The Role of Telecommunications in Hate Crime.”

There are those who want to keep hate speech “under the radar” and will claim that such an inquiry runs the risk of violating the First Amendment, Nogales said, acknowledging that there needs to be a balance between resolving the problem ­and respecting the First Amendment.

The NHMC petition asks the FCC to invite public comment.

Another speaker, former FCC chairwoman Gloria Tristani, commented that because of the logistics of the transition to a new administration, it might take weeks or months for the commission to act. “All we can do is push,” she said.

Ben Scott, policy director of Free Press, an organization active on Capitol Hill which advocates for greater media diversity, talked about how that balance could be kept. “This is not about censorship.

It’s about literacy, media literacy,” Scott said. He pressed for greater scrutiny, both by the media and public institutions, of hate speech. “We need people to become more involved.” Hispanic Link.