Native Americans Against McCain

By Evon Peter

evonpeter@mac.com

9/8/2008

My name is Evon Peter; I am a former Chief of the Neetsaii Gwich’in tribe from Arctic Village, Alaska and the current Executive Director of Native Movement. My organization provides culturally based leadership development through offices in Alaska and Arizona. My wife, who is Navajo, and I have been based out of Flagstaff, Arizona for the past few years, although I travel home to Alaska in support of our initiatives there as well. It is interesting to me that my wife and I find ourselves as Indigenous people from the two states where McCain and Palin originate in their leadership.

I am writing this letter to raise awareness about the ongoing colonization and violation of human rights being carried out against Alaska Native peoples in the name of unsustainable progress, with a particular emphasis on the role of Sarah Palin and the Republican leadership. My hope is that it helps to elevate truth about the nature of Alaskan politics in relation to Alaska Native peoples and that it lays a framework for our path to justice.

Ever since the Russian claim to Alaska and the subsequent sale to the United States through the Treaty of Cession in 1867, the attitude and treatment towards Alaska Native peoples has been fairly consistent. We were initially referred to as less than human “uncivilized tribes”, so we were excluded from any dialogues and decisions regarding our lands, lives, and status. The dominating attitude within the Unites States at the time was called Manifest Destiny; that God had given Americans this great land to take from the Indians because they were non-Christian and incapable of self-government. Over the years since that time, this framework for relating to Alaska Native peoples has become entrenched in the United States legislative and legal systems in an ongoing direct violation of our human rights.

What does this mean? Allow me to share an analogy. If a group of people were to arrive in your city and tell you their people had made laws, among which were:

1. What were once your home and land now belong to them (although you could live in the garage or backyard)

2. Forced you to send your children to boarding schools to learn their language and be acculturated into their ways with leaders who touted “Kill the American, save the man” (based on the original statement made by US Captain Richard H. Pratt in regards to Native American education “Kill the Indian, save the man.”)

3. Supported missionaries and government agents to forcefully (for example, with poisons placed on the tongues of your children and withheld vaccines) convince you that your Jesus, Buddha, Torah, or Mohammed was actually an agent of evil and that salvation in the afterlife could only be found through believing otherwise

4. Made it illegal for you to continue to do your job to support your family, except under strict oversight and through extensive regulation

5. Made it illegal for you to own any land or run a business as an individual and did not allow you to participate in any form of their government, which controlled your life (voting or otherwise)

How would this make you feel? What if you also knew that if you were to retaliate, that you would be swiftly killed or incarcerated? How long do you think it would take for you to forget or would you be sure to share this history with your children with the hope that justice could one day prevail for your descendents? And most importantly to our conversation, how American does this sound to you?

To put this into perspective, my grandfather who helped to raise me in Arctic Village was born in 1904, just thirty-seven years after the United States laid claim to Alaska. If my grandfather had unjustly stolen your grandfathers home and I was still living in the house and watching you live outdoors, would you feel a change was in order? Congress unilaterally passed most of the major US legislation that affect our people in my grandfathers’ lifetime. There has never been a Treaty between Alaska Native Peoples and the United States over these injustices. Each time that Alaska Native people stand up for our rights, the US responds with token shifts in its laws and policies to appease the building discontent, yet avoiding the underlying injustice that I believe can be resolved if leadership in the United States would be willing to acknowledge the underlying injustice of its control over Alaska Native peoples, our lands, and our ways of life.

United States legal history in relation to Alaska Natives has been based on one major platform – minimize the potential for Alaska Native people to regain control of their lives, lands, and resources and maximize benefit to the Unites States government and its corporations. While the rest of the world, following World War II, was seeking to return African and European Nations to their rightful owners, the United States pushed in the opposite direction by pulling the then Territory of Alaska out of the United Nations dialogues and pushing for Statehood into the Union. Why is it that Alaska Native Nations are still perceived as being incapable of governing our own lands, lives, and resources differently than African, Asian, and European nations?

Let me get specific about what is at stake and how this relates to Palin and the Republican leadership in Alaska and across this country. To this day, Alaska Native peoples are among the only Indigenous peoples in all of North America whose Indigenous Hunting and Fishing Rights have been extinguished by federal legislation and yet we are the most dependent people on this way of life. Most of our villages have no roads that connect them to cities; many live with poverty level incomes, and all rely to varying degrees on traditional hunting, fishing, and harvesting for survival. This has become known as the debate on Alaska Native Subsistence.

As Alaska Governor, Palin has continued the path of her predecessor Frank Murkowski in challenging attempts by Alaska Native people to regain their human right to their traditional way of life through subsistence.

The same piece of unilateral federal legislation, known as the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA) of 1971, that extinguished our hunting and fishing rights, also extinguished all federal Alaska Native land claims and my Tribe’s reservation status. In the continental United States, this sort of legislation is referred to as ‘termination legislation’ because it takes the rights of self-government away from Tribes. It is based in the same age-old idea that we are not capable of governing our people, lands, and resources. To justify these terminations, ANCSA also created Alaska Native led forprofit corporations (which were provided the remaining lands not taken by the government and a one time payment the equivalent of about 1/20th of the annual profits made by corporations in Alaska each year) with a mission of exploiting the land in partnership with the US government and outside corporations. It was a brilliant piece of legislation for the legal termination and cultural assimilation of Alaska Natives under the guise of progress.

Since the passage of ANCSA, political leaders in Alaska, with a few exceptions, have maintained that, as stated by indicted Senator Ted Stevens, “Tribes have never existed in Alaska.” They maintain this position out of fear that the real injustice being carried out upon Alaska Natives may break into mainstream awareness and lead to a re-opening of due treaty dialogues between Alaska Native leaders and the federal government. At the same time the federal government chose to list Alaska Native tribes in the list of federally recognized tribes in 1993. Governor Palin maintains that tribes were federally recognized but that they do not have the same rights as the tribes in the continental United States to sovereignty and self-governance, even to the extent of legally challenging our Tribes rights pursuant to the Indian Child Welfare Act. What good are governments that can’t make decisions concerning their own land and people?

The colonial mentality in and towards Alaska is to exploit the land and resources for profits and power, at the expense of Alaska Native people. Governor Palin reflects this attitude and perspective in her words and leadership. She comes from an area within Alaska that was settled by relocated agricultural families from the continental United States in the second half of the last century. It is striking that a leader from that particular area feels she has a right, considering all of the injustices to Alaska Native people, to offer Alaskan oil and resources in an attempt to solve the national energy crisis at the Republican Convention. Palin also chose not to mention the connection between oil development and global warming, which is wreaking havoc on Alaska Native villages, forcing some to begin the process of relocation at a cost sure to reach into the hundreds of millions.

Our tribes depend on healthy and abundant land and animals for our survival. For example, my people depend on the Porcupine Caribou herd, which migrates into the coastal plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge each spring to birth their young. Any disruption and contamination will directly impact the health and capacity for my people to continue to live in a homeland we have been blessed to live in for over 10,000 years.

This is the sacrifice Palin offered to the nation. The worst part of it is that there are viable alternatives to addressing the energy crisis in the United States, yet Palin chooses options that very well may result in the extinguishment of some of the last remaining intact ecosystems and original cultures in all of North America. Palin is also promoting off shore oil drilling and increased mining in sensitive areas of Alaska, all of which would have a lifespan of far fewer years than my grandfather walked on this earth and which would not even make a smidgen of an impact on national consumption rates or longer term sustainability. McCain was once a champion of protecting the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and it is sad to see, that with Palin on board, he is no longer vocal and perhaps even giving up on what he believes in to satisfy Palin’s position.

While I have much more to say, this is my current offering to elevate the conversation about what is at stake in Alaska and for Alaska Native peoples. Please share this offering with others and help us to make this an election that brings out honest dialogue. We have an opportunity to bring lasting change, but only if we can be open to hearing the truth about our situations and facing the challenges that arise.

Many thanks to all those who are taking stands for a just and sustainable future for all of our future generations,

*This essay is a personal reflection and should not be attributed to my tribe or organization

2007 victory: Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples adopted

NEW YORK – On Sept. 13, the United Nations General Assembly adopted the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, with 143 member states voting for it and 11 abstaining. Canada, the United States, Australia and New Zealand – four countries with sizable indigenous populations with legitimate claims to large land masses – voted against the adoption.

Not sure why it took so long for this to appear in Indian Country. . .  

While the declaration is not legally binding, the hope and expectation is that it will become a convention with the force of international law.

However, according to an Amnesty International report titled ”Canada and the International Protection of Human Rights: An Erosion of Leadership?” after the declaration was adopted ”Canada has gone on to claim – without any basis in international law – that states that voted against the Declaration should be exempt from the standard that it has set.”

The proposition that governments can opt out by simply voting against a declaration ”dramatically undercuts the integrity of the international human rights system. Every setback has wider impacts as well,” said Alex Neve, secretary general of Amnesty Canada. ”Millions of people around the world living the daily reality of relentless abuses of their human rights need to hear the full force of Canada’s voice on the world stage. Canada can and must do better.”

By contrast, www.nativobserver.org reported on Bolivia’s adoption of the declaration as national law. Bolivia is the first country in the world to do so.

Indian Country Today

Pledge: Become A Modern Day Warrior For Indigenous Rights (Updated & Edited)


NOT VANISHED, JUST OVER-LOOKED

“Viewing Native Americans as a people of the past is the most accessible, convenient perception for Americans.  While I believe it is important to create images that are historically, culturally correct and support the preservation of culture, I also believe it is imperative that a modern, contemporary representation of Native culture needs to surface in the mainstream.

A web of land theft in a “a new kind of Indian war” is taking place. Non Indians’ racism and genocide denial, who engage in attempting to steal tribal sovereignty through the court system, ignore an obvious question. Where would they meet to practice their religion, a white Caucasian word, if their churches were stolen, condemned, and being used to drill for oil and uranium? The “spirit” seems to be this: “What one group calls genocide, another group may call progress.” Let’s try to get an overview of the “progress” in the web of land theft in the “New kind of Indian war.”


August 26th  through the 29th was the SYMPOSIUM ON THE SETTLEMENT OF INDIAN RESERVED WATER RIGHTS CLAIMS (a good overview is here).

I am speculating, but I think that one reason for the Symposium on the Settlement of Indian Reserved Water Rights Claims was because of this:

Radiation Warning Signs Placed on Cheyenne River

Red Shirt Village — Residents of Red Shirt village on the northwest corner of the Pine Ridge Reservation have put up signs warning people of the high nuclear radiation levels found in the Cheyenne River.

Which, I assume in part resulted in this resolution being made.


Defenders of the Black Hills: a group of volunteers without racial or tribal boundaries working to ensure that the United States government upholds the Fort Laramie Treaties of 1851 and 1868.

NOW, THEREFORE BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED,
the GPTCA affirms that any person, agency or entity including federal, state, and county governments, or corporations, businesses or companies who shall cause any nuclear pollution, or contamination to enter the confines of the Indian Reservation Homelands should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, and

NOW, BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED,
the Great Plains Tribal Chairman’s Association calls upon all other Tribes and Indian Nations to join with us to protect our Reservation Homelands, to ensure that no damage will come to the people, the culture, the environment including the air and water and economy of the Tribes of the Great Plains because of uranium mining or other processing of contaminants in the region of the Great Plains Region.

Furthermore, I assume that this was created to combat the devastating affects of land theft and pollution in the above case, at the very least:


The Tribal Supreme Court Project is part of the Tribal Sovereignty Protection Initiative and is staffed by the Native American Rights Fund (NARF) and the National Congress of American Indians (NCAI). The Project was formed in 2001 in response to a series of U.S. Supreme Court cases that negatively affected tribal sovereignty.

This information at the international level, beginning with the Cobo Report, is crucial to understand in conjunction with all the above.

Chapter 6: International developments in the recognition of the rights of Indigenous peoples

The Cobo report, as it is commonly known, was prepared over the next decade. It was submitted to the Sub-Commission in 24 instalments between 1981 and 1984 with its conclusions and final recommendations compiled in a consolidated volume in 1987. Underpinning the report’s detailed conclusions and recommendations is the recognition that, despite the great diversity of their cultures and systems, Indigenous peoples throughout the world have common experiences of discrimination, oppression and exploitation.

– snip –

– recognition that Indigenous peoples and nations are subjects of international law and must be included within international law processes;

– recognition of Indigenous peoples’ special relationship to land and its integral link to their beliefs, customs, traditions and cultures and for efforts to be taken to maintain or restore that relationship;

– the ratification and implementation by States of international human rights treaties such as those on genocide, anti-slavery, racial discrimination, civil and political, and economic, social and cultural rights; and

– the establishment of a working group on Indigenous peoples at the United Nations under the Sub-Commission.[12]


The chairperson altered this, yet some were still against it (emphasis & underline mine).

SPEAKERS CALL FOR INCREASED INTERNATIONAL RECOGNITION OF INDIGENOUS RIGHTS,

Recognizing that most of the world’s remaining natural resources — minerals, freshwater, potential energy sources and more — are found within indigenous peoples’ territories, the sixth annual session of the Permanent Forum has brought indigenous groups together with representatives of Governments, intergovernmental organizations and United Nations agencies to state their views, voice concerns and suggest solutions regarding their lands, territories and natural resources.

We know how that went, don’t we?

It falied in the U.S.

Here is more information about it.

Since we’re talking about a web of land theft and “a new kind of Indian war,” I’m going to make this ending short and sweet about something more well known. I don’t agree with the Chief of the Cherokee Nation in regards to the freedman, but I really don’t agree with Diane Watson. Let me say why by posing a question which I believe reveals Watson’s intent in light of the fact that her “proposal” has so much support, while vital issues as Indian Health Care have failed. My question is based completely upon my own speculation.

Who gets the casinos after the Cherokee lose the right to use them?
Maybe it will be the Cheyenne State of Oklahoma and the U.S. Government. Should the world end their entire relationship with the U.S. based solely on the current sitting president? Right, please sign the pledge below.

Click on: Take A Stand! Click Here!

We “will accept nothing less than the U.S. government keeping the promises made to Native Americans.”