Welcome
to
Indigenous
Policy
Journal of the Indigenous Policy Network
(IPN)
Formerly American Indian Policy
| XX | Vol.
XVIV, No. 3______ Fall, 2008 DIALOGUING Tim Giago,
“How much did Indian settlement drop in fiscal mess?“
HOW MUCH MONEY DID THE INDIAN SETTLEMENT DROP IN FISCAL MESS? Tim Giago Republished
with author’s Permission from the Black
Hills Pioneer and the Rapid
City Weekly News, October 10,
2008, http://www.bhpioneer.com/articles/2008/10/10/opinion/doc48ed0801c4971156355540.txt When Lehman Brothers, Bear Stearns and Merrill Lynch took a shellacking in the world of high finances, many leaders of Indian tribes were hot on the phone lines to their brokers and money managers. I wonder how many of them will relay the information of their financial losses to their tribal members? Because of extreme secrecy, it’s hard to determine how much money was lost by the Indian nations, particularly tribes with rich casino operations, but you can place one sure bet on this fiasco: if they played the market they lost. On July 31, the money in the interest-bearing accounts of the tribes involved in Black Hills Settlement Claim, Docket 74B, was at $815,616,678.20 and the money invested in the Docket 74A account was at $113,193,512.73. If you combine the totals of these two accounts they come to $928,810,190.93 million. Now that is as close to $1 billion as you can get. How many members of the Great Sioux Nation knew what was in their accounts or how much money was lost on Wall Street? My sources tell me that millions of dollars of the Black Hills money was lost and the hope is that the announced federal bailout may help to recoup some or most of it. It strikes me as amazing that, in the 1980 U. S. Census, four of the 10 “Poorest Counties in America,” were located on Indian reservations in South Dakota, with Shannon County, the seat of the Pine Ridge Reservation, taking the number-one spot as the single poorest county in America. That was nearly 30 years ago, at the time the original awards of $105,994,430.52 for Docket B, and $40,245,807.02 for Docket 74A, were handed down by the Court of Claims to the tribes of the Great Sioux Nation. As you can see, after nearly 30 years, the interest-bearing accounts have grown considerably, but in those years there have been ups and downs as the market fluctuated. Docket 74B was for the illegal taking of the Black Hills and Docket 74A for the taking of lands east of the Hills. For all of the of gold, silver, uranium, timber, water and other natural resources taken from the stolen lands until this very day, the monetary award offered to the Lakota, Dakota and Nakota people was less than puny. It was an insult. The people of the Great Sioux Nation have not received a single shilling for the theft of their homeland. For all of those who boldly stand up on their hind legs and ask, “What about all of the money the Indians got for hospitals, schools, government and welfare?” the answer is for them to look into their own back yards at the millions they have received from the federal government for much of the same opportunities with one exception: They did not have to give up millions of acres of land to receive those benefits. All of the supposed gifts to the Indian people that non-Indians complain about were negotiated between two sovereign nations for the most part, or decided unilaterally by the federal government after it had consolidated its power over the Indian people. When the enemies of the United States became defenseless, that is when the outright theft of their lands began. When the poorest people in America turn up their noses at nearly $1 billion dollars, what does that tell you? And why is this one of the least-reported stories in this country? When a Lakota family is struggling to put food on the table or trying to find money to pay for a ride to the Indian hospital or grocery store or is looking at ways to survive another South Dakota winter with a premium on heating expenses, don’t you believe that they think about what they could do with the money sitting in a money market on Wall Street? And yet they refuse to accept the money. This is one of the major stories of the century and yet it continues to go unreported in the mainstream media and even in the American Indian media. Why? I would truly like for someone at CNN, MSNBC, FOX Network News or CBS, NBC and ABC or The New York Times, to give me and the Indian people an answer to that question. If the news was about a takeover of a village, a violent confrontation, or worse, the MSM would be here in droves, but this story is apparently of no interest to them. Not violent enough? Not shocking enough? Too bad because it is a story that is begging to be told in its entirety. If nothing else, the money lost by the Indian people of South Dakota by the money market collapse should be news. If it rocked America, it certainly rocked the “poorest of the poor.” Tim Giago, an Oglala Lakota, was born, raised and educated on the Pine Ridge Reservation in South Dakota. He was the founder and first president of the Native American Journalists Association and the founder and publisher of Indian Country Today, the Lakota Times, and the Dakota/Lakota Journal. He can be reached at najournalist@msn.com .
OPENING STATEMENT OF THE INDIGENOUS CAUCUS 11TH MEETING OF NEGOTIATIONS IN THE QUEST OF CONSENSUS, ORGANIZATION OF AMERICAN STATES, April 14th, 2008 This is the Collective consensus statement of the Indigenous Peoples' Caucus of the Americas attending the 11th session of Negotiations Seeking Points of Consensus for the "Draft American Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples" in Washington DC. It was developed by the consensus of the caucus representatives (North, South and Central America and Caribbean), and was read formally into the record of the opening session just 5 minutes ago by Armand McKenzie, representing the caucus. It was distributed to the states in both languages, enclosed. (Note: I am sending this out
as coordiantor of the drafting committee for the caucus' opening
statement, and thanks to Cassandra Smithies for her work on
translation with the drafting team over the weekend). Andrea
Carmen, Executive Director, International Indian Treaty Council
Administrative Office, 456 N. Alaska St., Palmer, AK 99645,
andrea@treatycouncil.org,
Office: 907-745-4482, Fax: 907-745-4484, www.treatycouncil.org. Respectful Greetings Mr. Chairman, and delegates of Indigenous Peoples and states. I am making this statement on behalf of the Indigenous peoples' caucus participating in this 11th session of Negotiations for the development of the American Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, in which Indigenous Peoples of North, Central, South America and the Caribbean are represented. We express our appreciation to the Secretariat of the Summit of the Americas as well as the donors for all the support they provided to ensure the participation of Indigenous Peoples in this Session. We come to this session with renewed enthusiasm based on the significant developments in the International arena to recognize the rights of Indigenous Peoples. We reaffirm that the Report of the Chair on the Session of Reflection on the meetings of negotiations for the search of the consensus (OEA/Ser.K/XVI GT/DADIN/doc.321/08) states that "The majority of States and all of the indigenous representatives supported the use of the UN Declaration as the baseline for negotiations and indicated that this represented a minimum standard for the OAS Declaration." When we met in November 2007, we agreed to complete a comparative analysis between the texts of the Draft American Declaration which have been drafted to date and the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples as adopted by the UN General Assembly on September 13th, 2007. This agreement was based on broad recognition that the UN Declaration is now the internationally-recognized standard on the rights of Indigenous Peoples. We reaffirm that work on the Draft American Declaration should proceed under the following principles: 1) Nothing in the American Declaration can fall below the standards set out in the UN Declaration ˆ in other words the UN Declaration constitutes the minimum standard and, in accordance with international legal principles, a regional instrument cannot fall below the standards recognized in this universal document. 2) The American Declaration can build upon the standards set by the UN Declaration and include a more detailed articulation of the specific rights of Indigenous Peoples; and 3) That the two Declarations should be congruent with one another. Our work on the American Declaration must be undertaken with the intention to reiterate and reinforce key areas and aspects of the UN Declaration. These include, among others, the right to self-determination, free prior informed consent and rights to traditionally owned and used lands, resources and territories. Distinguished Indigenous Peoples' and states' delegates, in this OAS process we have a unique opportunity to affirm and build upon the provisions and rights in the UN Declaration, and to expand upon them in response to the particular needs and concerns of the Indigenous Peoples of the Americas. Indigenous Peoples have a great deal to gain from working together in a spirit of cooperation, good faith and full partnership with states to develop a strong American Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and to achieve its adoption as soon as possible. We cannot agree to be part of a process that seeks to undermine what we have already achieved in the international arena. We congratulate states such as Bolivia , and courts such as the Supreme Court of Belize which have already used the UN Declaration to advance the implementation of the rights of Indigenous Peoples within those countries. We call upon other states in the Americas to take similar steps without delay. We recognize that of the 34 OAS member states, only the United States and Canada voted against the UN Declaration, and Columbia abstained. As a result, these states take the position that the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples does not apply to them and should therefore not be used as the minimum standard in these negotiations. However, we call the attention of this Working Group to two important developments which demonstrate that this position is not valid. On March 7th 2008, the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD) released its recommendations in response to the United States ' Periodic Report submitted to the Committee last year. The CERD recommended that the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples be used by the US as a "guide to interpret the State Party's obligations under the Convention relating to Indigenous Peoples". This recommendation supports the position of Indigenous Peoples and a number of international legal experts, and ties the implementation of the UN Declaration to the legally binding obligations of all state parties to the Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination, even states such as the US which voted against the Declaration's adoption. In addition, on April 8th, 2008, the House of Commons in Canada passed a motion calling on the Canadian Government to "endorse the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples as adopted by the UN General Assembly on 13 September, 2007 and that Parliament and Government of Canada fully implement the standards contained therein". We call on the Government of Canada to fully implement this democratically-adopted motion by its own Parliament, and to reverse its continuing opposition to the UN Declaration in international fora, including this Working Group. The UN Declaration provides a new framework for improved relations between the governments and the Indigenous peoples of the world, based on mutual respect. The American Declaration can also become such a historic new framework for States and Indigenous Peoples in the Americas whereby the rights of Indigenous Peoples can be further affirmed, respected and upheld. The urgent and critical need for this new framework is clear, as the rights and survival of Indigenous Peoples in all 34 member states of the OAS continue to be threatened and violated. Imposed development including mining and deforestation, environmental contamination, destruction of biodiversity and traditional means of subsistence, violation of Treaties, expropriation of lands and resources, denials of cultural rights and destruction of sacred sites, militarization of Indigenous lands, policies which attempt to extinguish Indigenous Peoples' rights and undermine their self-determination, forced removals and a variety of other adverse impacts are increasingly undermining Indigenous peoples' dignity, security and well being and in many cases, their survival as distinct Peoples. A strong and principled American Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples developed in partnership between the Indigenous Peoples and states of the Americas will be another very important step towards protecting Indigenous peoples who are facing grave threats as a result of actions by states and non-indigenous parties. In this light, it is important to emphasize that the consensus referred to in document GT/DADIN/doc2461/06/rev.7 prepared for this session addressing the procedure for the prompt conclusion of these negotiations must include Indigenous Peoples and not just states as currently proposed. This is the only way to ensure that the process will be legitimate and its outcome a success. The need is urgent and the time is now to move forward in our efforts, based on the principles and concerns presented in this statement. The Working Group sessions must be focused in actual negotiations on the Draft American Declaration text in order to move towards to its prompt approval. Other issues such as a Plan of Action, thematic seminars and a Permanent Office for Indigenous Peoples can be discussed in other OAS forums held apart from the Working Group's negotiation sessions. We are here with a good spirit, to build upon what we have achieved and to advance our partnerships with states, under the principle of free prior informed consent as was called for in the Plan of Action of the 2nd International Decade of the Worlds Indigenous Peoples. For all our relations.
UBUNTU, “WORLD FORUM OF CIVIL SOCIETY NETWORKS FORUM TO ACHIEVE THE MDGs, TO TACKLE TODAY’S CRISES (FOOD, THE CLIMATE, …): LET US CREATE A CURRENCY TRANSACTION TAX FOR FINANCING DEVELOPMENT (CTT for FfD)” I, September 4, 2008 (Ubuntu is an age-old
African term for humaneness - for caring, sharing, and being
in harmony with all of creation. As an ideal, it promotes co-operation
between individuals, cultures, and nations.) A great gathering of Heads of State and Government will take place in New York during the week of 22-26 September for the High Level Meeting on the Millennium Development Goals, as part of the opening of the new session of the United Nations' General Assembly (the 63rd session). Later on, from 29 November to 2 December, the Follow-up International Conference on Financing for Development to Review the Implementation of the Monterrey Consensus will be held in Doha, the capital city of Qatar. Article 2 of the Monterrey Consensus on Financing for Development (March 2002) records this assertion: "We note with concern current estimates of dramatic shortfalls in resources required to achieve the internationally agreed development goals, including those contained in the United Nations Millennium Declaration — the MDGs". It is now acknowledged by all that it is practically impossible to achieve the MDGs by the deadline set, mainly because, even at this late stage, we are not seeing any change in the funding trends for Financing Development, and that change is essential for achieving those goals. We thus find ourselves facing an international political situation that is at once paradoxical and unjustifiable: a) on the one hand, renewed support for the MDGs at the highest level will probably be aired in New York, with a flurry of fine words but a complete absence of effective commitments for achieving them; b) on the other hand, the Monterrey Consensus will be reviewed in Doha, and it too will probably be endorsed again in virtually the same terms as 6 years ago, but once again with no measures being taken to assure that the resources needed for its implementation will be available. Hence nothing will be done to resolve the predicament so clearly enunciated in that second article quoted above, particularly now when crises in food, the climate and other areas are posing a challenge for humanity as a whole. We, the undersigned people and organizations from civil society, at the initiative of the World Forum of Civil Society Networks — UBUNTU, wish to call for NO MORE empty words, NO MORE sterile statements, and NO MORE inefficacy and apathy. However, we also wish to say that there ARE workable solutions, solutions that we present and propose, demanding that they be discussed and approved, and in particular that they be implemented immediately afterwards, in the period between the New York meeting and the Doha meeting. In this communiqué, which cannot be exhaustive, we focus on one particular measure we regard as essential, and it is one that, in addition to providing very tangible specific solutions, will also take us into a scenario of international work and implementation efforts. It is now essential for us — humanity as a whole — to tackle the problems we are facing from that scenario: through a reformed and reinforced United Nations. SPECIFICALLY, WE PROPOSE THAT THE OUTCOMES OF THE DOHA MEETING SHOULD INCLUDE THE CREATION OF a Global Tax on Currency Transactions (CTT for FfD) as an additional, predictable, stable and sustainable source of Financing for Development, the funds from it being channelled into multilateral funds run by the United Nations for use, initially, in achieving the MDGs by 2015. This would have several effects: This CTT for FfD would lead to the collection of "a significant amount of resources for development while not interfering with the normal functioning of the market", since the levy involved would be tiny according to studies by the Technical Groups of Action against Hunger and Poverty (led by Brazil, France, Chile, South Africa, Spain, Germany...). According to leaders from some of the countries mentioned above, global levies should be regarded as a "normal" counterpart provided in return for the profits that the great transnational financial corporations obtain from globalization. We fully embrace that idea! This CTT for FfD would respond to the United Nations' General Secretary's concerns when he noted "renewed international interest in a possible currency-transaction 'development levy' of 0.005%, a minuscule tax [...] having the potential to generate billions of dollars that can be allocated for development. [...] Currency transaction taxes involve more than one country [... and] are best implemented in a cooperative manner among countries." ii This CTT for FfD would have a global base, since location and territorial issues are irrelevant in the Foreign Exchange Market (FOREX), the market used for currency transactions iii . Thus the CTT we are proposing can be applied to the global financial sector as such, with the funds collected being transferred directly to a Multilateral Fund held by the United Nations, which would make a huge contribution to reinforcing the role of that organization in achieving the MDGs. IN SHORT, WE PROPOSE THAT FINANCING FOR DEVELOPMENT BE BASED NOT ONLY ON OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE (WHICH MUST OF COURSE NOW BE RAISED WITHOUT FURTHER DELAYS OF ANY KIND TO 0.7% OF THE GDP OF THE RICH AND POWERFUL COUNTRIES), BUT ALSO ON THE INDISPENSABLE AND JUST REDISTRIBUTION OF THE ECONOMIC WEALTH GENERATED IN THE WORLD . Such redistribution can only be assured by a reformed system of international institutions, one that must evolve, as we always say in the context of the "WORLD CAMPAIGN FOR IN-DEPTH REFORM OF THE SYSTEM OF INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTIONS", towards a new system of Democratic World Governance capable of collecting and managing those global levies, among other things. "CTT for FfD" - "Currency Transaction Tax for Financing for Development". The proposal refers to the application of a tiny levy (in the region of 0.005%) on international currency movements. Given the huge amount of money involved in currency exchanges, applying this tax would enable a very significant amount of resources for development to be collected. With the tax rate mentioned by the UN Secretary General, the amount collected would add up to just over 50% of total Official Development Assistance (ODA) from the world in 2007, according to all the estimates made. Those two sources together (funds collected from the CTT + ODA) would cover the resources needed to achieve the MDGs, according to the appraisal made by Jeffrey Sachs in 2005. The global currency-exchange market or Forex (Foreign Exchange Market) is the largest financial market in existence. In general, this market is not subject to any tax regulations, since its technological nature (whose development was backed by the world's Central Banks) makes it virtually a globalized market. Money flows in that market are eminently speculative, the aim always being to boost the profits of transnational financial corporations. Applying the CTT we are proposing would be the first experiment in redistributing the wealth generated in that market. Federico Mayor, Mario Soares, Susan George - Author and Board Chair of Transnational Institute, Noam Chomsky, Aminata Traoré - ASF - African Social Forum, Kailash Satyarthi - Global March Against Child Labour, Margaret O. Blomberg - NFO Committee on Financing for Development (FfD), Cândido Grzybowski - IBASE - Instituto Brasileiro de Análises Sociais e Econômicas, Chico Whitaker - Right Livelihood Award; Brazilian Commission Justice and Peace, Roberto Savio- IPS - Inter Press Service, Saskia Sassen - Committee on Global Thought Columbia University, John Foster - North-South Institute & Social Watch, Gigi Francisco – DAWN, Tomas Magnusson - IPB - International Peace Bureau, Miquel de Paladella - Global Movement for Children, Ricardo Díez Hochleitner - Honorary President Club of Rome, Herman Spanjaard - IPPNW -International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War, Mary-Winne Ashford - Past Co-President of International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War, Shula Koenig - PDHRE-People's Movement for Human Rights Learning, Sara Longwe - FEMNET - African Women's Development and Communication Network, Fatma Alloo - DAWN Africa, Meja Vitalis - AFRODAD - African Forum and Network on Debt and Development, Elizabeth Eilor - AWEPON - African Women's Economic Policy Network, Martin Tsounkeu - ADIN - Africa Development Interchange Network, Nadia Johnson - WEDO - Woman Environment Development Organitzation, Philo Morris - Medical Mission Sisters, Mohammed Fayek - Arab Organization For Human Rights, Marino Busdachin - UNPO – Unrepresented Nations and Peoples Organisation, Rómulo Torres - LATINDADD - Red Latinoamericana sobre Deuda, Desarrollo y Derechos, Ernesto Lamas - AMARC ALC - Asoc. Mundial Radios Comunitarias - América Latina Caribe, Felix Dodds - Stakeholder Forum, Fintan Farrell - European Anti Poverty Network, Martí Olivella - Alliance for Responsible, Plural and United World, Vicente García - CIVICUS - UN representative, Francine Mestrum - AEDH - Agence européenne pour la défense des droits de l'homme, Arcadi Oliveras - Justice and Peace Europe, Jorge Nieto - Centro Internacional para la Cultura Democrática, Miquel Àngel Essoba - Centre UNESCO de Catalunya, Fèlix Martí - Honorary President Linguapax Institute, Antoni Giró - Rector UPC - Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya, Richard A. Falk - Princeton University; California University, Hall Gardner - Professor American University of Paris, Josep Ferrer - Professor Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya – UPC, Ferran Requejo - Professor Universitat Pompeu Fabra – UPF, Sean O Siochru - CRIS - Communication Rights in Information Society Campaign, Josep Xercavins - UBUNTU Forum Ad Hoc Secretariat, professor UPC. If you wish to support this statement go to: http://www.ubuntu.upc.edu/index.php?lg=eng&pg=2&ncom=26.
ELDERS
GATHERING FOR "THE ONE NATION" STATEMENT, As most of you know, on September 13, 2007, the United Nations' General Assembly approved the much touted United Nations' Declaration on The Rights of Indigenous Peoples (the "UN Declaration"). Although this UN Declaration, importantly, recognizes the right of our Nations to seek self-determination, it does not, in and of itself, take the next step to advance the cause of Indigenous Sovereign Nations around the world. The One Nation IS that next step, the necessary next step to lead us forward. Again, those who know will understand that the traditional governing systems and the traditional cultures of these Indigenous Sovereign Nations were and continue to be decimated by laws enacted by their "host" countries, including Canada, the United States, Australia, New Zealand, Fiji, the Caribbean and numerous others, which laws, among other things, impose false (proxy) (foreign) governments and laws on our peoples, and force our Nations to bow before the colonizing courts to resolve inter-nation disputes with them. This Declaration of true Sovereignty has the blessing of the Creator, the one true Law. The creation of The One Nation "immediately" frees the Indigenous Sovereign Nations to re-assert their sovereignty, an inherent sovereignty granted by the Creator to each human at birth, which was never surrendered and never could have been surrendered. It has taken the Indigenous Sovereign Nations over 200 years to regroup and arrive at this crucial point in history to re-commence performing their sacred duties to care for Mother Earth, all Her creatures, great and small (and, hence, all humans too). It is no accident and no coincidence that the Creator has chosen this time to arrange for the re-assertion of these ancient Nations. The air, the water, the land and all living things are in danger now as never before. The One Nation is born from all things positive, not from anger for past oppression and atrocities undeniably committed. These things are forgiven. When the colonizers arrived, as predicted in the Prophesies, our ancestors welcomed them and cared for them, as the Creator instructed, when they could not care for themselves. They were like children sitting at our feet in need of sustenance, which many of our ancestors gladly provided. The children grew up steadily over the course of several hundred years, only to rebel against their caregivers, reacting with greed and forgetfulness of all that was done for them and all that we tried to teach them, harming our Mother the Earth in the process. For this they must also be forgiven. The time has come, however, when these now young adults must realize and admit the error of their youthful and frivolous ways and turn once again to the wisdom and care of those who raised them. Unwittingly, they developed along the way the technological and linguistic means for all Indigenous Sovereign Nations to now join together with one good mind and one pure heart for the good of all humans. To keep in mind a message from Hereditary Chief Gary Metallic, Mi'Kmaq; ‘This Declaration must be signed by not only representing Chiefs but also by the elders, women, men, children who will validate the legitimacy of our new nationhood.’ In conclusion, The One Nation extends an open invitation to all Indigenous Sovereign Nations to join on this historic and epic peaceful path into the future and also to convey this all-important message to all colonizing states: ‘The One Nation extends, once again, its open hand in friendship and in good faith as our gesture of our desire to continue to coexist for the benefit and respect of all living creatures and our one true Mother, the Earth herself.’ Written by: Edna (Grandma) Gordon, Seneca Hawk Elder: To overcome the Cultural Barriers of Divided Nations, a Declaration of Principles within Yourself, The Youth, and All Races of Mankind is to keep the Sacred Fires of our Ancestors burning for Future Generations to learn the Wisdom Knowledge of the Elders. Bless your Sacred Fires to Gather in Unity for Inspiration, Harmony, Cultural Exchange, Identity and Respect for One’s Heritage. Spread Your Wings in Balance like the Butterfly, the Bird, the Hawk, and the Eagle to scale the Heights of Your Creative, Potential Self to Light the Spiritual Fires Within. There are some things in Life that you Cannot Change, the Eternal things. The VisionFirst, let it be known that the “vision” set forth herein is written by humble humans, with no direct knowledge of what the Creator may have in store. It is not a “plan” and is not even a “blueprint.” It is simply and humbly the best guess of the direction in which The One Nation is to take to assist each of us individually and as part of The One Nation to take all the appropriate actions and steps in this material realm to bring about the changes required by the Creator, as assisted by the Ancestors and the multitude of “helpers,” whose assistance is acknowledged and to whom we give our Great Thanks! This Statement has been reviewed by as many of the Elders involved as possible so as to assure its credibility and veracity as we move forward on this journey, as we participate in this “happening.” It was suggested that this journey be referred to as a “happening,” rather than any other name, such as “movement.” This, because there are many movements in various walks of life, from lofty goals such as civil rights (race, gender and religion), to even more mundane movements such as a grassroots political party. This is not to detract from the importance of these “movements,” but to simply state that what we have undertaken has been long-awaited and has far-reaching consequences that even we cannot anticipate or contemplate, a “happening.” We cannot talk about the vision without reference to its essential roots, The Prophesies. Each Nation involved, through its Elders, has expressed the sense that what we are engaged in is somehow associated with the Promise made by the Creator to all “true humans” in “the beginning” to bring about, at the appropriate point in time, a world in which our spirits will be freed to live in accordance with the Instructions from the Creator, with generosity to others, sharing what we have, courageousness, peace (both inner and external) and harmony, best expressed in the “Declaration of Principles” first written above. It is up to each of us to determine whether we want to continue along the path of greed, lies, deception, illusion, isolation, fear, anger, violence and hatred, or whether we will “walk through the door” that has now been opened to us. We have heard it said that many have lost their connection to Mother Earth and have been overtaken by the materialistic societies that surround us. We have heard it said that by losing that connection, we have lost our connection to the spiritual. Therefore, we have heard it said that in order to regain that connection for each of us and for all true humans and the children yet to come, we must re-establish that connection. Everyone has a different way of expressing these thoughts, but most acknowledge that these thoughts are true. We can call the Nameless One, the creator of all, the Creator or Great Spirit or The Great Reality or The Great Mystery (or however else you have been taught to make reference and pay homage). We can subscribe to the traditional teachings of our Ancestors or to the teachings of Jesus or Buddha or Jehovah or any other spiritual body of principles, but there is only one Great Reality of which we are all a part and we can each agree that the time has come. Our Mother Earth is under attack as never before. The signs are clear to us that the time for unification of all indigenous Nations is here. We acknowledge that all peoples of Mother Earth are indigenous to somewhere, that the fortunate few Nations that have made it through the onslaught of the so-called “civilized world” are the ones that have been selected to join together and to assist all others to regain their indigenous cultures that were taken from them long ago, some at the hands of the Byzantine Empire, some at the hands of the Roman Empire, some at the hands of the Imperial Chinese or Japanese Empires or , as now, at the hands of the colonizing empires. One thing is clear. The culture of each of these indigenous peoples, including their languages and ceremonies, was stolen from them and must be returned. We know this because our Nations were under the same attack by the same forces, with different names and faces, but coming from the same dark source. The attacks indeed continue to this day, although more subtle and devious than outright massacre as practiced in the past. This is where we are. As all of us know, on September 13, 2007, the United Nations’ General Assembly approved the United Nations’ Declaration on The Rights of Indigenous Peoples (the “UN Declaration”). Although this UN Declaration, importantly, recognizes the right of our Nations to seek self-determination, it does not, in and of itself, take the next step to advance the cause of Indigenous Sovereign Nations around the world. The One Nation IS that next step, the necessary next step to lead us forward into our future and the future of the succeeding generations. Humbly, we agreed on March 30, 2008, at a seminal conference call, that the Algonquin Nation would “light the torch” of The One Nation by signing the Declaration on April 20, 2008, the first Full Moon of the Spring. This was done and other Nations have since signed and will continue to do so. The sense of the Elders present at the signing was that a powerful “door” or “portal” had been opened through which all may walk by signing the Declaration. Otherwise, the next major gathering for the purpose of signing is currently scheduled to take place on July 8-9, 2008, at Greenbelt Park (campground) (301-344-3944) (174 campsites available), Maryland, 12 miles North of Washington, D.C., 2 days prior to the conclusion of The Longest Walk, when many Elders and Nations from around the world will be present. It is hoped that the Dalai Lama will also be present for this sacred event (not known whether Tibet might sign). The Australian and New Zealand Sovereign Indigenous Nations have already begun their own signing across their sacred lands at their sacred “Dreamtime” sites, which will continue through this Summer, 2008. The torch will be passed across The Australian and New Zealand Continent at that time. This signing may take a couple of months to be accomplished, but it will be accomplished. Thereafter, or at the same time, it is anticipated that other Nations from other continents will also sign. It is believed that, as more Nations sign, and as the “word” circulates Elder to Elder, Nation to Nation, eventually all Nations that were supposed to sign, will sign. As said above, there are many peoples whose culture was stolen and procedures will need to be set in place at the appropriate time to return to these peoples their culture and their “Nationhood,” so that these Nations, then newly declared as such, may join the One Nation. At the same time, or thereafter, as deemed best by the Elders at the time, provision will be made for individuals to become citizens of The One Nation. These individuals, who are many, will have no affiliation with an indigenous Nation, but will need to be “sheltered” under the protective wings of The One Nation in some fashion and under certain procedures to be established by the Elders of The One Nation. This is much like the way a citizen of an existing country may change citizenship from one country to another or perhaps maintain a “dual” citizenship. Perhaps the most immediate benefit of The One Nation is its ability to access International Tribunals, something most (if not all) indigenous Nations are currently unable to do. Most (if not all) of the time, we have been forced to allow the colonizing “host” country to decide disputes we might have with that “host” country (as when we are drawn into the US, Canadian, Australian or other courts to resolve “sovereignty” issues, where we are almost certain to lose) (as has been the case historically). The One Nation will be considered an “equal” among all existing countries of the world, with the equal ability to access a more neutral tribunal to determine disputes over the environment, land, resources, such as water/ air, etc, This, so that we may take our rightful place as stewards of Mother Earth and the environment. There are many Elders who believe, who say that they “know,” that The One Nation is Prophesied to replace the other existing countries in the world, whose demise is imminent. To these Elders, whose vision must be respected, if not followed, The One Nation is destined to be THE entity to provide organization and stability to all of our precious Nations when the other countries “melt away” from whatever causes. We say no more on this, but mention this for the sake of a complete, honest and open discussion of the vision in accordance with our traditional principles. THIS “VISION STATEMENT” HAS BEEN REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY THE ELDERS OF THE NATIONS WHO HAVE SIGNED THE DECLARATION AS OF THE DATE OF THIS STATEMENT, AND BY THE ELDERS AND OTHER SUPPORTERS OF THE ONE NATION UNDER THE “UMBRELLA” OF “THE SOVEREIGNTY PROJECT.” Closing Prayer: As my being walks along the plane of Mother Earth It sends humble Great Thanks for the grandeur of your many Blessings. The Beauty of Your Creation radiates Your intent of Harmony, Upon me and the Spirits walking beside me. I humbly stand before You by virtue of Your Grace And pray, by virtue of Your Grace, to be guided along Your pathway of Love, Respect, Peace, Unity and Spiritual Harmony Between and among all beings, seen and unseen. For more information contact: Hereditary Chief Gary Metallic, Mi’kmaq, gmetallic@hotmail.com, (603)598-4834; Elder Jacob Wawatie, Algonquin, wigibiwajak@hotmail.com, (819)438-1866; Dr. Yussuf Kly, Int’l Law, U. of Regina; Yussuf.kly@uregina.ca 250-483-7369; Debra Thomas, Shuswap, blueraven2008@hotmail.com (604)723-9829; Anthony J Pasquariello, Esq. (Mohawk), tonyplaw@optonline.net, (201)410-8253; KWE ,Chuck & Tina People of the Land /Algonquin, nottawayratt@hotmail.com, (819)334-1802; http://www.onenationvision.com/.
ONE THOUGHT FOR IMPROVING THE UN PERMANENT FOURM ON INDIGENOUS ISSUES Stephen Sachs During and after last spring’s UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues meeting, there was some substantial criticism of the forum members over their wording of the resolution relating to the World Bank Carbon Trading Program, which – while stating some reservations about the program and proposing some limitations for it – did not go nearly as far in opposing its provisions as did many Indigenous people and organizations. (See the discussion of this in International Developments, IPJ, spring 2008, the report of the session at: http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/unpfii/documents/UNPFII_7session_report_advance.pdf, and in “Permanent Forum: Unprofessional and gets personal,” Indigenous Rights Quarterly, Vo. I, No. 3, July – September, 2007 (http://www.aitpn.org/IRQ/vol-II/Issue-03/story08.html). Forum Chairman Victoria Tauli-Corpuz, an indigenous leader from the Philippines whose own published views on the question are similar to those of her Indigenous critics, responded to the criticism (both at the session and afterwards) saying, in part, that the Permanent Forum is not a purely indigenous forum, but includes governments of states, recommending action to the UN on issues of concern to Indigenous peoples. In other words, to maximize indigenous interests, as closely as possible harmonizing them with all other interests, in practice, it is necessary, to appropriately temper the expression of the indigenous position, which requires sensitive balancing. While agreeing with that proposition in principle, and without examining how well the forum members did in achieving a proper balance in the case of the World Bank carbon trading system, there remain some related questions about the forum’s functioning, that I believe can be improved. The July-September 2007, Indigenous Rights Quarterly, critique found that the largest concern is that, “So long as indigenous peoples' statements are not included in the Annual Reports to the ECOSOC, indigenous peoples will increasingly fail to relate to the Forum. The Forum will eventually lose its relevance to the activists. The proposed new mechanism of the Human Rights Council may indeed hasten the process of the Permanent Forum's ultimate irrelevance.” Officially, the Forum is a group of experts on Indigenous affairs that makes its own recommendations to the UN through its Economic and Social Council. Every spring the Forum holds an open meeting with representatives of Indigenous and Indigenous concerned organizations, at which the representatives of states and international organizations also speak. While the participants have no formal power to make decisions for the forum, they can and do influence its work by their recommendations to the Forum, and through their impact on world opinion (as well as having an important opportunity to interact and network). Every year many documents stating the views of participating non-governmental organizations, Indigenous and non-Indigenous, along with those of states and international organizations (such as the World Bank) are available in print at the meeting, but are not made part of the official record. Given the limited staff and budget of the Forum, it may not be possible for its secretariat to scan or transcribe all of those papers into a computerized public record that could be made available on line. But since all those documents are made on computer to begin with, it would be a relatively simple and inexpensive process to invite anyone, or any organization, attending the meeting to submit their statements via E-mail, or on disc, or perhaps even word processed by the submitter on site into the available UN computer terminals, to be part of the record of the session, that would be available on the Forum web site. If it were necessary, as a practical matter, limitations could be made on the number and length of statements in the proceedings. I believe this would expand the power of Indigenous groups and organizations, while providing an equal opportunity to states, in a traditional Indigenous inclusiveness that invites presentation of all views, and all aspects of issues. I also think that it would be interesting to have available the statements of Indigenous peoples and organizations along with those of states, to be able to compare the positions for later analysis and discussion. Where states express legitimate concerns. those could be brought together with Indigenous expressions of interest to move toward an equitable balance. Where states make claims that are inaccurate, or unjust, that could be illuminated by the Indigenous expressions. All of this would be available to expand public discussion of Indigenous issues, and expand Indigenous influence upon governmental and international organizational decision making. There is precedent for governmental organizations keeping a record of their proceedings on the basis of turned in documents, rather than by real time transcription of the oral statements. This was long the practice of the United States Congress in compiling the Congressional Record. In any case, this might be a practice worth considering.
|
XX |
