"The Sidelining of Trinidad's Indigenous People."

The sidelining of Trinidad's indigenous people.

By Tony Fraser

Caribbean Intelligence

Trinidad's Amerindians seeking a heritage site

 

         

The fast-disappearing Amerindian community in Trinidad is petitioning for the national Parliament, housed in the history-rich “Red House”, to be moved.

 

Instead, they say, the area in downtown Port of Spain should become a heritage site dedicated to their ancestors buried under the building more than 1,700 years ago.

 

This community – approximately 1,000 to 1,500 descendants of mixed blood – are, thankfully, willing to compromise, but want some recognition as the first people of Trinidad.

 

“If that be asking too much to remove the ‘seat of power’ to allow a shrine to be built here to commemorate our ancestors, then in the restored building, there must be a recognition of our ancestors buried under the building,” said the chief of the Carib community, Ricardo Bharat-Hernandez.

 

The chief, the Carib Queen and a small group of the First Peoples of the Community of Arima were recently allowed access to the compound of the Red House.

 

The seat of the Trinidad and Tobago parliament is now undergoing major reconstruction. During this work, archaeological artefacts and human bones were discovered in March.

 

“What was found so far is a small amount of pottery, but it fits the period of AD 0 to AD 350,” said University of the West Indies (UWI) archaeologist, Peter Harris.

 

“While we haven’t got the whole story yet, I’m sure that if things were found so closely together in a place, they’re likely to be related. 

 

“We’re a long way from knowing what village or what was there on that site, but we do know the bones found are almost certainly Amerindian.”

 

Chief Bharat-Hernandez told Caribbean Intelligence© that the small group of Amerindian descendants who went on to the Red House compound “communicated with the ancestors in the prayer and ceremonial ritual known as the Purublaka”.  

 

Ancient battleground

 

Archaeologists believe the site could have been a battleground between two tribes, in what was then a forested area. 

 

“The Community wishes to assert their rights to revitalise their cultural traditions and to maintain protect and develop this archaeological site and the remains found therein,” Chief Bharat-Hernandez said.

 

He sent a letter to the Speaker of the House, Wade Mark, seeking to establish their rights as enshrined in the United Nations Declaration on Indigenous Peoples.

 

Article 11 of the UN Declaration states: “Indigenous peoples have the right to practice and revitalise their cultural traditions and customs.

This includes the right to maintain, protect and develop the past, present and future manifestations of their cultures, such as archaeological and historical sites, artefacts, designs, ceremonies, technologies and visual and performing arts and literature.”

 

Chief Bharat-Hernandez pointed out to the Speaker that the Declaration requires that “states shall provide redress through effective mechanisms, which may include restitution, developed in conjunction with indigenous peoples, with respect to their cultural, intellectual, religious and spiritual property taken without their free, prior and informed consent or in violation of their laws, traditions and customs.”

 

Whether such claims would extend to a country’s seat of parliament is another matter.

 

But the Carib community are sure to press their claims for space and recognition as renovations at the 106-year old Red House continue.

 

Red hot Red House

 

Historically, the Red House is no stranger to controversy.

 

The present building was reconstructed in 1907, four years after the original building was burnt to the ground by residents of Port of Spain in protest at an attempt by the Legislative Council of the day to place water meters in homes as a means of charging water rates.

 

In the 1930s, the period of the country’s Labour Riots, it was a focal point of protest by trade union agitator Uriah “Buzz” Butler and a large group of Grenadian-born workers in the oilfields of south Trinidad, who engaged in a Hunger March to the city.

 

In 1990, at a sitting of the national Parliament, the Red House was the target of a group of Black Muslim insurrectionists under Imam Yasin Abu Bakr.

 

Having bombed the next-door police headquarters, the Muslimeen group stormed and took over the Red House, in effect the Parliament chamber, in their attempt to stage a coup.

 

Prime Minister ANR Robinson, several members of his cabinet and members of the opposition were held hostage in the building for six days before the group surrendered to the armed forces besieging the building.

 

The Muslimeen, having negotiated what they believed was an amnesty given by the President of the Republic, surrendered only to face lengthy national and appeal court hearings.  

 

Raze the Red House

 

Today, the Amerindian population wants to level the Red House, or at least to see it recognised for different reasons.

 

But those ambitions of the Amerindian population long pre-date the archaeological find of a few months ago.  

 

For many decades, the Amerindian community in Arima, a town 17 miles east of the capital which hosts a statue of 17^th Century Amerindian warrior chief Hyarima, has petitioned successive governments for a 25-acre plot of land of its own.

 

“The intention is to re-create a model Amerindian village, to establish a cassava factory [cassava being a staple of the Amerindian diet] and to develop it as a tourist venture for the community to be self-sufficient; we don’t want hand-outs from the State,” said Chief Bharath-Hernandez, proclaiming the pride of his ancestral community.

 

Dominica’s Kalinago

 

He likens the idea to the Amerindian community in Dominica, which belongs to the Kalinago people of that nation.

 

The chief says that establishing the village community has the potential to encourage the young people of Amerindian descent to aspire to knowledge of their ancestral cultural patterns. 

 

He notes that, at present, there is little that keeps them attached to the way of life of their grandparents and great-grandparents.

 

But Chief Bharath-Hernandez told Caribbean Intelligence© that, while there are far larger Amerindian communities in Dominica and Guyana with descendants who have stronger blood ties to the past, the smaller Trinidad community has still “preserved quite a lot of the rituals and ceremonies of our forefathers”.

 

Outside Arima, in the deep south-west of Trinidad, towns and villages such as Cedros, Icacos, Siparia and Erin all derive their names from the First Peoples. Communities of Amerindian descent have been claiming sites such as the San Fernando Hill, once named Naparima, and also want to establish them as heritage sites.

 

“We have been living here for the past 7,000 years,” Rabina Shar, leader of the group in south Trinidad, said in January 2011 in a letter of complaint to Prime Minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar. 

 

“We want to organise and approach the government for recognition and lay claim to sacred sites.”

 

He noted in his letter that the national census had failed to recognise and categorise the indigenous peoples.  

 

“We are the first nation and everybody [else] come late. We want to be respected by all in society.”

 

Indigenous background

 

The United Nations 2009 report State of the World’s Indigenous Peoples paints a frightening picture of the condition of indigenous peoples today.

 

“The situation of indigenous peoples in many parts of the world continues to be critical: indigenous peoples face systemic discrimination and exclusion from political and economic power; they continue to be over-represented among the poorest, the illiterate, the destitute; they are displaced by wars and environmental disasters; the weapon of rape and sexual humiliation is also turned against indigenous women for the ethnic cleansing and demoralisation of indigenous communities; indigenous peoples are dispossessed of their ancestral lands and deprived of their resources for survival, both physical and cultural; they are even robbed of their very right to life. In more modern versions of market exploitation, indigenous peoples see their traditional knowledge and cultural expressions marketed and patented without their consent or participation.”

Trinidad and Tobago Organization of Indigenous People: Facebook

Trinidad and Tobago Organization of Indigenous People: Facebook

"The T.T.O.I.P. is a new organization working in conjunction with other indigenous groups in Trinidad and Tobago to preserve the heritage of our First People. We look to seek the economical, cultural, social, and political rights of Indigenous people, especially the young generation.

For we can not know where we are going, if we do not know where we come from."

We do not have an equal place in T&T. Santa Rosa chief wants recognition:

We do not have an equal place in T&T.
Santa Rosa chief wants recognition:
By by Julien Neaves
Trinidad Express |  Mar 10, 2013 at 10:54 PM ECT

ANY reform of the Constitution must include the recognition of the status of indigenous peoples, said Chief of the Santa Rosa First Peoples Community, Ricardo Bharath-Hernandez.

He was one of the attendees at the third meeting of the National Consultation on Constitutional Reform on Saturday evening at the Arima Town Hall.

Bharath-Hernandez noted that the United Nations has adopted the Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, in September 2007. He said, locally, they have begun to see some form of recognition for the first time.

He pointed out that while the National Anthem of Trinidad and Tobago says "every creed and race finds an equal place", he did not feel the indigenous peoples had an equal place.

Bharath-Hernandez recalled that he served as People's National Movement councillor and deputy mayor for 18 years and had lobbied unsuccessfullyfor indigenous people.

He pointed out in 1982 when Canada had their Constitutional reform they recognised the rights of the aboriginal peoples (Indian, Inuit and Métis). He predicted that his lobbying efforts locally would have been more successful if indigenous peoples were included in the Constitution.

Another attendee noted that late Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez was being praised for championing the rights of indigenous peoples in his country. He noted that indigenous people have long been marginalised and they needed to be included in this country's reformed Constitution.

Legal Affairs Minister Prakash Ramadhar, in his remarks, noted that Constitutional reform has plagued this country for many years. He noted that the People's Partnership Government came into office with the promise of Constitutional reform in a number of areas and the consultation was a fulfillment of that promise.

He said for many years people have complained that the only time they get to exercise their democracy is on election day.

"We believe the people of Trinidad and Tobago should say what kind of Constitution they want. That is why we didn't put a Draft Constitution, put it out for comment, put it out for consultation. We believe from the voices of the people we will have the will to come up with a Constitution...that is really a contract between the people and those given the authority to govern," he said.

A total of 17 consultations are to be held from March 4 to May 4 at 14 locations in Trinidad and three in Tobago.

The next consultation will be at the Sangre Grande Civic Centre today at 5 p.m.

Racial Discrimination: The Caribs, the Government of Trinidad and Tobago, and the United Nations

In at least two previous articles I discussed the responses and positions taken by successive governments of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago with respect to the nature and extent of recognition of the Indigenous presence in the country, particularly in response to queries from the United Nations and in connection with the failure to admit a Carib or Amerindian or Indigenous category in the national census (see: "Does Trinidad Recognize Its Indigenous People?" and "News about Trinidad's Caribs and the State"). What I want to do now, after a delay of a few years, is to go into greater depth concerning the details of Trinidad's responses to the UN, and the questions that have been posed to successive Trinidadian governments by UN committees about just how in fact Trinidad "recognized" Indigenous persons in the country. Unfortunately, even with a delay of years, this topic is still timely.

First, let's begin with a key document: that by the United Nations Committee for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD), "Compilación de observaciones finales del Comité para la Eliminación de la Discriminación Racial sobre países de América Latina y el Caribe (1970-2006)" provided below (and the original on CERD's site). The International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination was first adopted in 1965, and entered into force in 1969. The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD) "is the body of independent experts that monitors implementation of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination by its State parties".

The report in question covers a period of 36 years and consists of summaries that in the case of Trinidad and Tobago repeatedly focused on the Caribs on Arima--not even the Caribs of Arima themselves knew about the existence of these documents and government statements.

1980
In 1980, (Report of the thirty-fifth session Supplement No. 18 [A/35/18], starting on page 547) CERD indicated from early on that it had a special interest in the fate of the Caribs, even if we are not clear as to how CERD even learned about a Carib presence since this time pre-dates the formal act of recognition that occurred in 1990:

"131. ...Moreover, additional information was requested on measures to encourage multiracial organizations and movements and on programmes aimed at enabling the Carib Indian population to participate in the country's development" (p. 548).

1981
In 1981, (Report of the thirty-sixth session Supplement No. 18 [A/36/18], starting on page 544) CERD asks about the following:

"436. ...Further information was also requested on their economic status, on Government plans to aid backward regions or economically disadvantaged groups, on specific development programmes for the Carib and Arawak people, on steps taken to enable them to preserve their identity, on the reaction of ethnic groups to the introduction of the Hindi language in schools and on the effectiveness of measures taken by Trinidad and Tobago in 1980 to combat racism and racial discrimination. Reference was made, in particular, to the question as to how laws could continue to be valid while offending against the provisions of the Constitution, and it was asked whether an unjust law which came into being during the colonial period would still have to be applied in the country and whether an unjust law which had been enacted by Parliament after independence could be declared unconstitutional by the High Court, the Court of Appeal or the Privy Council" (p. 545).

CERD clearly indicates here that it values cultural survival, and believes that the state should work to support that. What is also interesting is what comes in the last few sentences of the above paragraph, which places a large question mark on the nature of Trinidadian state "independence". It seems that a number of colonial laws have been maintained, even though they violated the Constitution of the Republic.

What is interesting to note is how the Trinidadian government replied about the number of Caribs in Trinidad--especially since they have not been counted on any census since Independence:

"442. ...The Carib-Indian population was extremely small, numbering less than 300, and had almost disappeared as a separate group" (p. 545).

This is orthodoxy in action. There is no evidence to support such an assertion, and therefore the assertion comes from somewhere other than actual documentation. In fact, it is a repetition of well worn narratives written by colonial elites almost 150 years beforehand. See this for example on the number of surviving Indigenous People:

“At present there cannot be above 200 or 300 Indians in the colony, so that the aborigines may be said to be almost extinct….finally sunk under the ascendancy of a more intelligent race….but I also coincide in opinion with some judicious observers, who trace the approximate extinction of those tribes to the marked presence manifested by the Indian women towards the negroes and the whites, by whome they were kindly treated, whilst they were regarded by their husbands, of kindred race, more as slaves and beasts of burden, than as equals or companions. As a consequence of those connections, there exists at present, in the colony, a certain number of individuals of Indian descent, but of mixed blood” (De Verteuil, 1858, p. 172). 

“All but” disappeared:

“as in most other similar cases, persecution or civilization, perhaps both, have driven before them these wild children of the plains, until they have become, so far as Trinidad is concerned, all but extinct” (Collens, 1886, p. 7).

It is remarkable to see the exact same claims made nearly 150 years later, including the demographic size of the Carib community, which would imply some extremely strict enforcement that couples must produce no more than two children, ever. In other words, failing the credibility test, the Trinidadian state has no explanation for the outlandish demographic stasis that it seems to present as fact.

1984
In 1984, CERD (Report of the thirty-ninth session Supplement No. 18 [A/39/18], starting on page 542) indicates the following need for information:

"198. With reference to article 2 of the Convention, information was requested on the state of relations between the different racial and ethnic groups in Trinidad and Tobago. The Committee was of the view that it would be useful to receive statistics on the country's demographic composition and to know on what basis individuals were classified as belonging to a given ethnic group. Moreover, members wished to know which ethnic groups were disadvantaged and what measures were being taken to enable them to catch up with the rest of the population, whether there were any refugees in Trinidad and Tobago and, if not, whether the Government was prepared to admit any into the country, whether comparative data could be made available on the educational level, literacy rate and income of the different ethnic groups, particularly of the Carib people, and whether any positive measures had been taken to protect and encourage the economic and social progress of the Carib people" (p. 542).

From early on then, CERD was clearly, and later repeatedly, keen to get data on the Caribs, which the Trinidadian state was simply not collecting, which also puts into very bold relief the question of what is the nature of Trinidad's recognition of its Indigenous People?

1987
In 1987 (Report of the forty-second session Supplement No. 18 [A/42/18], starting on page 539) we read that CERD was requesting specific statistical details about the number of Caribs, among other groups:

"452. ...Members requested further information regarding the ethnic composition of the population, in particular, the ratio of Africans to East Indians, who together accounted for 81.5 per cent of the total population, and the percentage of Caribs in the population. It was pointed out, however, that in the case of Trinidad and Tobago, the various ethnic groups were intermingled and that identification with a particular group was only possible in a very limited number of cases" (p. 540).

Here we see an instance of where the government of Trinidad and Tobago is unsure of how to respond to questions of racial identification that presume sort of clear dividing lines, in light of a long history of unions that cross ethnic lines. Indeed, it is not uncommon on older censuses to find a huge minority of Trinidadians declaring themselves to be "Other". CERD does not seem to clarify its statements.

1998
In 1998, CERD (Report of the fiftieth session, Supplement No. 18 [A/50/18], starting on page 536) asked the government of Trinidad and Tobago to explain what is in fact a doctrinal orthodoxy in narratives of Trinidadian history produced by the colonial elites since the early 1800s, and that is the idea that "the Caribs had all but disappeared":

"34. Members of the Committee asked why the Caribs had all but disappeared, exactly how many were left, why they were not treated as a separate racial group and whether measures were being taken to help them, particularly in the economic and educational fields, so as to compensate them for the injustices they had suffered" (p. 536).

This is both positive and problematic, and it is not as if CERD is above criticism itself. CERD astutely targets a suspicious statement by the Trinidadian government (we don't have the statement itself, but we can infer it from CERD's response) about the Caribs having "all but" disappeared, and yet not providing any numbers because they are not counted on the census and therefore the assertion is made without evidence. On the other hand, CERD assumes that the Caribs must be racially distinct to be recognized as a "separate" group, which is an almost alarming statement that would seem to reinforce racial conceptions rather than eliminate them. For the Trinidadian government, and those within it who had some knowledge of the Caribs, the idea that they could cast the Caribs as "racially separate" must have seemed both odious and ridiculous, when by the admissions of most members of the Santa Rosa Carib Community in Arima, they are "mixed". However, that too is inadequate, because it equates culture and ethnicity with genes. If CERD really seeks to eliminate racial discrimination, it needs to clean up its own language, which seems to ask governments to discriminate among citizens (in the sense of discerning who is what) in racial terms, while ignoring cultural differences.

What is also questionable is whether the Trinidadian state should be compensating the Caribs for past injustices, committed by the British colonial regime, and whether the Trinidadian state is thus liable for British actions, as if this formed part of its inherited obligations. As noted in 1981, the Trinidadian state was still maintaining and enforcing colonial laws that pre-dated independence, and in this case, is the Trinidadian state not a continuation of colonialism by other means? Then the question becomes, why just compensate the Caribs and not others, such as Africans who were enslaved? This is a very complicated question, which is why it is surprising to see CERD making these statements in such an unproblematized fashion.

It is also worth noting that the government of Trinidad and Tobago had not responded to CERD for a total of 11 years (the report says eight years, but provides no entry for Trinidad in 1990), for reasons which are not indicated.

2001
In 2001 CERD (Report of the fifty-sixth session, Supplement No. 18 [A/56/18], starting on page 532) rejected the Trinidadian government's position that there was no racial discrimination in Trinidad and Tobago: "348. The assertion by the State party as to the absence of racial discrimination on its territory was not accepted by the Committee and it was recommended by the Committee that the State party reconsider this stand" (p. 533).

With specific reference to the Caribs, in 2001 CERD stated:

"351. The Committee expresses its concern at the absence in this report of specific information on the indigenous population as well as other relatively small ethnic groups of the State party in the report, and particularly the absence of a specific categorization of the indigenous population as a separate ethnic group in official statistics on the population. The Committee encourages the Government to include the indigenous population in any statistical data as a separate ethnic group, and actively to seek consultations with them as to how they prefer to be identified, as well as on policies and programmes affecting them" (p. 534).

2005
Now we move on to a different set of UN documents, beginning with the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) "Country Programme Strategy for the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago" published in 2005. There is not the same sense of interrogation and reply that we with the CERD reports above, but clearly the following involves information supplied by the Trinidadian state, which mirrors (sometimes word for word) statements found on some websites including those produced by myself, using wording that I used for brochures made for the Santa Rosa Carib Community. This is what the UNDP states about the Caribs under "2.5 Indigenous Peoples and Vulnerable Groups" on page 7:

"Indigenous Peoples in Trinidad and Tobago are represented by Amerindian peoples who have existed in Trinidad for as long as 7,000 years before the arrival of Columbus, and numbered at least 40,000 at the time of Spanish settlement in 1592. All of Trinidad was populated by several tribes, Trinidad being a transit point in the Caribbean network of Amerindian trade and exchange. Amerindian tribes were referred to by various names: Yaio, Nepuyo, Chaima, Warao, Carinepogoto, Aruaca, Shebaio, Saluaio, etc. In 1996 the Santa Rosa Carib Community Organisation was formally incorporated as a limited liability company under the Companies Act".

Actually, the year of incorporation was 1976. Needless to say, what continues to be missing from these official documents is any mention of any attempt to ask Trinidadians if they identify as Indigenous, Carib, or any other cognate term. What we do see is minimal effort invested in the act of reporting, and a continued reliance on "authoritative knowledge".

2011
On September 22, 2011, Rodney Charles, Trinidad and Tobago's Ambassador to the United Nations, delivered a statement at the "High-Level Meeting of the United Nations General Assembly to Commemorate the Tenth Anniversary of the Adoption of the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action". The section dealing with the Caribs was especially brief, and instructive for being not just so minimal but also for its focus:

"Other festivals are also observed such as the Santa Rosa Carib Festival which pays tribute to our indigenous population, as well as Double Ten Day, in honour of our local Chinese population" (p. 4).

In other words, they do not even get a whole sentence to themselves, and are mentioned in passing under "other festivals". Festivals: this mention represents the Trinidadian state's continued effort to "showcase" its Indigenous Peoples, which albeit a form of recognition is one that reduces Indigenous identity and community to a mere adjunct of the state's efforts to display diversity, rather than deal with it seriously.

Wikileaks: The U.S. Embassy in Trinidad and Tobago, the Amerindians, and Indigenous Rights

Thanks to the recent release of WikiLeaks' U.S. Embassy cables, we have a complete set for Trinidad and Tobago, and many of the items are quite striking and revealing. One is of particular relevance to Trinidad's Indigenous community. It seems that the U.S. Embassy worked to temper any Trinidadian embrace of a new Indigenous Rights charter (that being drafted by the OAS), and that on the other hand, the Trinidadian government had a very selective view of what rights it had actually signed on to at the UN, as well as seeming agreeable to making concessions to the U.S. Of course none of this international diplomatic chatter on the rights of Trinidad's Indigenous People was previously made public.

Apparently the public profile of Trinidad and Tobago's Indigenous community, specifically the Santa Rosa Carib Community, came up in discussions between the Government of Trinidad and Tobago (GOTT) and an officer in the Political Affairs section (PolOff) of the U.S. Embassy in Port of Spain, according to a WikiLeaks cable. The cable is marked as "sensitive but unclassified". In a meeting that took place on 22 October 2007, Ms. Delia Chatoor of the Multilateral Affairs Division of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs mentioned that "Trinidad and Tobago's own small Amerindian community had recently become more vocal, and that a week dedicated to the history and culture of the group had just concluded [Amerindian Heritage Week]". These remarks were made in connection with developing a government position on the work of the Organization of American States (OAS) in preparing a Draft Declaration of Indigenous Rights (DRIP) (also see this and that), and in light of the then recent passage of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples--which the GOTT approved. We already know, from other WikiLeaks cables, that the U.S. worked actively on the international front to try to pressure governments to vote against the UN Declaration. However, the remarks by the Trinidadian government official are rather curious.

With reference to the UN Declaration, Chatoor commented that "states could...pick and choose which items to endorse"--when the GOTT in fact voted to approve the Declaration as a whole, not select parts. This comment suggests some duplicity on the part of the government, in that it might "pick and choose" those elements which it found to be least of a challenge to the dominant order. To her credit, she also told the U.S. Embassy official that "the UN declaration was important as a means of reminding people indigenous rights was not a dead issue and that indigenous communities should be factored into considerations of human rights".

However, when it came to the OAS DRIP, Chatoor seemed to agree with the U.S. Embassy that instead of a Declaration, "a Year of Action and a non-binding action plan also had merit". Merit for whom? Certainly not for Indigenous Peoples, as this would mean the adoption of superficial, symbolic actions. While she earlier implied that the more vocal Amerindian community in Trinidad had an impact on the Government's decision-making regarding Indigenous Rights, her subsequent willingness to concede to U.S. interests, and her delegating authority to Trinidad's diplomatic mission at the OAS before reaching any decision, make it apparent that the rights of Trinidad's Indigenous People are not as important as they ought to be--and they are apparently subject to negotiation with foreign powers.

Border Militarization Destroys Indigenous Communities

Alex Soto, Tohono O’odham:

"...the Border Patrol troops are the real trespassers, not us. How can I, a Tohono O'odham person, be trespassing on my own land? Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Border Patrol, Immigration Custom Enforcement and their corporate backers such as Wackenhut, are the true criminals. Troops and paramilitary law enforcement, detention camps, check points, and citizenship verification are not a solution to ‘issues’ of migration. Indigenous Peoples have existed here long before these imposed borders, and Elders inform us that we always honored freedom of movement. Why are Indigenous communities and the daily deaths at the border ignored? The impacts of border militarization are constantly being made invisible in and by the media, and the popular culture of this country. Even the mainstream immigrant rights movement has often pushed for 'reform', which means further militarization of the border, leading to increased suffering for Indigenous communities. Border militarization destroys Indigenous communities." (see: O'odham: Border Patrol Lock Down Trespassing Charge Dropped, CENSORED NEWS, 23 June 2011)

In Arizona, O'odham have been mobilizing against the Border Patrol that has disrupted and displaced indigenous communities and militarized their space. As Alex Soto explains, "Currently the state of Arizona is pushing for the construction of the South Mountain Loop 202 freeway extension on Akimel O’odham land (Phoenix Area). The Loop 202 is part of the CANAMEX transportation corridor, which is part of the larger NAFTA highway project. The two proposed routes will either result in a loss of approximately 600 acres of tribal land, and the forced relocation of Akimel O'odham and Pee-Posh families or would gouge a 40-story high, 200-yard wide cut into Muadag Do'ag (O'odham name for South Mountain), which is sacred to all O'odham and Pee-Posh."

With the construction of the current fortified U.S./Mexico border, 45 O’odham villages on or near the border have been completely depopulated. According to No More Deaths, from October 2009 to April 2011 there have been more than 338 deaths on the Arizona border alone. In addition, 1,200 National Guard troops have been stationed along the southwestern border since June 2010. Also, the state of Arizona recently passed a bill which will allow for Arizona to build its own border wall. The law goes into effect July 20 of this year. The video below was produced as part of the O'odham mobilization against the militarization of their border areas:

In connection with this, please see the O'odham Solidarity Across Borders Collective, and the Border Opposition Action Fund.

Regarding border militarization, see Brenda Norrell's "Hacked data reveals US Marines as contract killers, hunting migrants on the border." Thanks to the hacktivism of LulzSec which penetrated the Arizona Department of Public Safety last week, just before the group closed down, we learn of the hunting and murder of migrants by U.S. Marines along the Arizona border.

Arizona law enforcement officers were aware that migrants were being hunted by off-duty Marines patrolling the border with assault weapons. The information was contained in a report from October 2008 by Arizona's High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area Investigative Support Center:

"In other incidents reported in October, U.S. Border Patrol agents encountered two subjects who claimed to be members of the Border Watch Group the Blue Lights based on the Caballo Loco Ranch. The subjects, armed with pistols and at least one M4 rifle, were dressed in full desert camouflage uniforms, similar to those of the United States military. They stated they were not members of the Minutemen, but paid contract employees who ‘get the job done’ and ‘were not just volunteers.’ They possessed valid United States Marine Corps identification cards."

As Norrell explains, "Arizona and federal agents have largely ignored the militia and white separatist groups patrolling this area, along the border of the Tohono O’odham Nation, south of Three Points, and southwest of Tucson."

Canada Endorses UN Declaration on Indigenous Rights

Now joining New Zealand and Australia, Canada becomes the third of the four settler nations to endorse the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, with the U.S. continuing to hold out. Canada, the U.S., Australia, and New Zealand, were the only four states to oppose the Declaration, one that Canada had previously worked on securing. New Zealand backed the UN Declaration in mid-April 2010, while Australia also did an about face and endorsed the Declaration in April of 2009 (see the response by Michael Dodson, rapporteur for the UN Permanent Forum for Indigenous Issues). Australia also issued a formal apology to members of the stolen generation.

---

From Canada's Dept. of Foreign Affairs and International Trade:

Canada’s statement of support on the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples

November 12, 2010

Today, Canada joins other countries in supporting the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. In doing so, Canada reaffirms its commitment to promoting and protecting the rights of Indigenous peoples at home and abroad.

The Government of Canada would like to acknowledge the Aboriginal men and women who played an important role in the development of this Declaration.

The Declaration is an aspirational document which speaks to the individual and collective rights of Indigenous peoples, taking into account their specific cultural, social and economic circumstances.

Although the Declaration is a non-legally binding document that does not reflect customary international law nor change Canadian laws, our endorsement gives us the opportunity to reiterate our commitment to continue working in partnership with Aboriginal peoples in creating a better Canada.

Under this government, there has been a shift in Canada’s relationship with First Nations, Inuit and Métis peoples, exemplified by the Prime Minister’s historic apology to former students of Indian Residential Schools, the creation of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, the apology for relocation of Inuit families to the High Arctic and the honouring of Métis veterans at Juno Beach.

These events charted a new path for this country as a whole, one marked by hope and reconciliation and focused on cherishing the richness and depth of diverse Aboriginal cultures.

Canada continues to make exemplary progress and build on its positive relationship with Aboriginal peoples throughout the country, a relationship based on good faith, partnership and mutual respect.

The Government's vision is a future in which Aboriginal families and communities are healthy, safe, self-sufficient and prosperous within a Canada where people make their own decisions, manage their own affairs and make strong contributions to the country as a whole.

The Government has shown strong leadership by protecting the rights of Aboriginal people in Canada. The amendment to the Canadian Human Rights Act, the proposed Gender Equity in Indian Registration Act and the proposed legislation concerning matrimonial real property rights on reserve are just a few recent examples.

This government has also taken concrete and viable actions in important areas such as education, skills development, economic development, employment, health care, housing and access to safe drinking water. These are part of a continuing agenda focused on real results with willing and able partners.

At the international level Canada has been a strong voice for the protection of human rights. Canada is party to numerous United Nations human rights conventions which give expression to this commitment.

Canada has a constructive and far-reaching international development program that helps to improve the situation of Indigenous peoples in many parts of the world. Canada’s active involvement abroad, coupled with its productive partnership with Aboriginal Canadians, is having a real impact in advancing indigenous rights and freedoms, at home and abroad.

In 2007, at the time of the vote during the United Nations General Assembly, and since, Canada placed on record its concerns with various provisions of the Declaration, including provisions dealing with lands, territories and resources; free, prior and informed consent when used as a veto; self-government without recognition of the importance of negotiations; intellectual property; military issues; and the need to achieve an appropriate balance between the rights and obligations of Indigenous peoples, States and third parties. These concerns are well known and remain. However, we have since listened to Aboriginal leaders who have urged Canada to endorse the Declaration and we have also learned from the experience of other countries. We are now confident that Canada can interpret the principles expressed in the Declaration in a manner that is consistent with our Constitution and legal framework.

Aboriginal and treaty rights are protected in Canada through a unique framework. These rights are enshrined in our Constitution, including our Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and are complemented by practical policies that adapt to our evolving reality. This framework will continue to be the cornerstone of our efforts to promote and protect the rights of Aboriginal Canadians.

The 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games were a defining moment for Canada. The Games instilled a tremendous sense of pride in being Canadian and highlighted to the world the extent to which Aboriginal peoples and their cultures contribute to Canada’s uniqueness as a nation. The unprecedented involvement of the Four Host First Nations and Aboriginal peoples from across the nation set a benchmark for how we can work together to achieve great success.

In endorsing the Declaration, Canada reaffirms its commitment to build on a positive and productive relationship with First Nations, Inuit, and Métis peoples to improve the well-being of Aboriginal Canadians, based on our shared history, respect, and a desire to move forward together.

From the Permanent Mission of Canada to the United Nations:

Canada Endorses the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples

(November 12, 2010) The Government of Canada today formally endorsed the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples in a manner fully consistent with Canada’s Constitution and laws. Canada’s Ambassador to the United Nations, Mr. John McNee, met with the President of the United Nations General Assembly, Mr. Joseph Deiss, to advise him of Canada’s official endorsement of the United Nations Declaration.

“We understand and respect the importance of this United Nations Declaration to Indigenous peoples in Canada and worldwide,” said the Honourable John Duncan, Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development and Federal Interlocutor for Métis and Non-status Indians. “Canada has endorsed the Declaration to further reconcile and strengthen our relationship with Aboriginal peoples in Canada.”

“Canada is committed to promoting and protecting the rights of Indigenous peoples,” said the Honourable Lawrence Cannon, Minister of Foreign Affairs. “Canada’s active involvement abroad, coupled with its productive partnership with Aboriginal Canadians, is having a real impact in advancing indigenous rights at home and abroad.”

The United Nations Declaration describes the individual and collective rights of Indigenous peoples. It sets out a number of principles that should guide harmonious and cooperative relationships between Indigenous peoples and States, such as equality, partnership, good faith and mutual respect. Canada strongly supports these principles and believes that they are consistent with the Government’s approach to working with Aboriginal peoples. While the Declaration is not legally binding, endorsing it as an important aspirational document is a significant step forward in strengthening relations with Aboriginal peoples.

“Canada’s Aboriginal leadership has spoken with passion on the importance of endorsing the Declaration. Today’s announcement represents another important milestone on the road to respect and cooperation,” added Minister Duncan.

Canada’s endorsement builds upon numerous other government initiatives for Aboriginal peoples on education, economic development, housing, child and family services, access to safe drinking water, and the extension of human rights protection and matrimonial real property protection to First Nations on reserve.

From SHAWN A-IN-CHUT ATLEO - NATIONAL CHIEF OF THE ASSEMBLY OF FIRST NATIONS - PRESS RELEASE:

November 12, 2010

National Chief Welcomes Canada’s Endorsement of UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples: Respect, Partnership and Reconciliation will Guide Work to Improve the situation of First Nation Peoples and Build a Stronger Canada

OTTAWA, ON: Assembly of First Nations National Chief Shawn A‐in‐chut Atleo stated that Canada’s endorsement of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples is a positive development that sets the stage for a new approach to building stronger First Nations and a stronger Canada.

“Today marks an important shift in our relationship and now the real work begins,” National Chief Atleo said. “Now is our time to work together towards a new era of fairness and justice for First Nations and a stronger Canada for all Canadians, guided by the Declaration’s core principles of respect, partnership and reconciliation. First Nations have worked long and hard to set out constructive and effective approaches and to abandon the colonial relationship embodied in the Indian Act that has held back our people and this country. We are ready to move now – today – on our key priorities including education.”

The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples was adopted by the UN General Assembly on September 13, 2007. Canada committed to endorsing the UN Declaration in the 2010 Speech from the Throne. The UNDRIP has the distinction of being the only Declaration within the United Nations which was drafted with the rights‐holders, themselves, the Indigenous Peoples of the world.

“Today is important, not as the culmination of our efforts, but as the beginning of a new approach and a new agenda,” the National Chief stated. “Canada’s apology for the residential schools in 2008 was a critical moment to acknowledge the pain of the past. Endorsing the Declaration is the opportunity to look forward and re‐set the relationship between First Nations and the Crown so it is consistent with the Treaties and other agreements with First Nations upon which this country was founded. In endorsing the UN Declaration, Canada is committing to work with us as a true partner to achieve reconciliation as instructed by the courts in Canada.

I congratulate Canada in taking another step towards the promotion and protection of human and fundamental freedoms for all.”

The Assembly of First Nations is the national organization representing First Nations in Canada.

Restitution for Aboriginal Australia

In a conservative and European-dominated society such as Australia, whose very basis of existence is premised on the expropriation of indigenous access to the land, an impassioned call such as Rev. Peter Adams' will likely rock many boats. The extensive press coverage of his statements in Australia is an indication of the salience achieved by his call. Here are some links and extracts:

Send all non-Aborigines back to where they came from
The Australian, 12 August 2009

Extract: "ALL non-Aboriginal Australians should be prepared to leave the country if the indigenous people want that, making restitution for the vile sin of genocide, an Anglican leader said last night. If they stayed, they would have to provide whatever recompense indigenous peoples thought appropriate, the Reverend Peter Adam said. 'It would in fact be possible, even if very difficult and complicated, for Europeans and others to leave Australia. I am not sure where we would go, but that would be our problem. No recompense could ever be satisfactory because what was done was so vile, so immense, so universal, so pervasive, so destructive, so devastating and so irreparable. The prosperity of our churches has come from the proceeds of crime. Our houses, our churches, our colleges, our shops, our sport grounds, our parks, our courts, our parliaments, our prisons, our hospitals, our roads are stolen property'."

Australia, the Aborigines, and restitution: Such an impossible task may help us focus on real ways to make amends
The Age, Barney Zwartz, 13 August 2009

Extract: "ANGLICAN theologian Peter Adam thinks that unless Australia's indigenous people give us belated permission, everybody whose forebears came after 1788 should decamp and return the land to its first inhabitants. In a public lecture on Monday, he said that if the non-indigenous stayed they should have to provide whatever recompense the indigenous thought appropriate for the genocide and theft they have suffered....The Christian concepts of repentance and restitution or recompense are profoundly radical. Adam's idea is in keeping with the biblical concepts, even if these are honoured more in the breach than the observance now that Christianity is so institutionalised."

Just recompense to Aboriginal people necessary: Anglican theologian
CathNews, 13 August 2009

Extract: "Principal of the Anglican theological Ridley College, Dr Peter Adam says Christians must consider appropriate recompense to Australia's Aboriginal peoples, who suffered European colonisation, church planting and nation-building....'Do churches have any responsibilities in these matters? Yes, because the land and wealth of churches came from land stolen from the indigenous people of Australia. The prosperity of our churches has come from the proceeds of crime'."

Peter Adam urges 'recompense' for Indigenous injustice
Christian Today, 11 August 2009

Extract: "In an address to be presented tonight, Dr Peter Adam, Principal of Ridley College in Melbourne, will call on Christians to consider appropriate “recompense” for the injustice suffered by Indigenous Australians as a result of European colonization, church planting and nation-building. Dr Adam will give the Second Annual John Saunders Lecture at 7.00 pm at Morling College, Macquarie Park, Sydney. The lecture will discuss Aboriginal land claims, the history of injustice against Indigenous Australians, and appropriate Christian responses including the question of recompense."

••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

Personally, I rather like some of the important symbolic and political possibilities of national indigenization that are implied in Adam's vision. One aspect of his call involves seeking permission to stay. In Canada, where we use the label "First Nations" to refer to Aboriginals, one would think that they would have some say on who enters and stays, especially if by implication other people in Canada are "Second Nations," "Third Nations" and so forth (labels not in use). There should be some form of honorary Aboriginal citizenhip offered to all non-Aboriginal Canadians, which involves permission to stay in return for some acts of service and commitment to the First Nation that adopts them.

What do you think?

Ecuador: Indian Federation Confronts Threats

Thanks to Indian Country Today's article by David Dudenhoefer "Ecuador’s Amazonian Indian confederation faces varied threats" (10 August 2009), from which the following was derived:

About 100 representatives of Ecuador's Amazonian Indian communities met to celebrate the inauguration of new leadership for the Confederation of Indigenous Nations of the Ecuadorian Amazon (CONFENIAE).

Among their latest concerns are "government’s promotion of mining, oil exploitation and hydroelectric projects in the Amazon threatens indigenous lands and natural resources."

“The spirit of our ancestors is present in all of our nations, and in the common idea that we need to defend our territory – our territory is not for sale. Our territory is protected by all of our nations, because we are part of our territory.”

Throughout the 1990s, CONFENIAE mounted massive demonstrations that led to negotiations. The government then recognized and legalized large indigenous territories in the Amazon. The organization suffered deep internal schisms when some of its leaders joined the government of President Lucio Gutierrez in 2003, later pushed from power from huge popular protests. As a result the group was discredited and its collaborating leaders left it bankrupt.

The new CONFENIAE leader, Tito Puanchir, a Shuar Indian, vows that they will never again form political alliances with ruling groups.

The new leadership notes that Ecuador’s President Rafael Correa is supervising the drafting of a constitution that recognizes Ecuador as a "pluri-national state" – a reference to the country’s 13 indigenous and afro-Ecuadorean minorities – also enshrining the rights of nature. However, Correa has opened the door to oil exploration and mining on or near indigenous land.

“There are plenty of reasons to say no to oil exploration here,” said former CONFENIAE president Domingo Ankuash, Shuar. He said 40 years of oil extraction in the northern Amazon has hardly benefited the region’s indigenous inhabitants, but all of them have suffered from the pollution caused by oil spills and poor disposal of toxic wastes.

“Eighty percent of the money from oil leaves the country, and most of the 20 percent that stays here is robbed by a few corrupt politicians. What little goes to the municipalities near the oil wells is spent in urban areas, so it doesn’t even reach the (indigenous) communities.”

Instead, what indigenous leaders want to promote is a vision of "good living": good health, clean water, a healthy environment and a strong culture.

Nicaragua's Miskitos Seeking Independence?

The BBC reported on 03 August 2009, in an article by Stephen Gibbs titled "Nicaragua's Miskitos seek independence," that a group of elders have proclaimed their loyalty to the "Community Nation of Moskitia." No indication is provided of the degree to which these elders represent the popular wishes of fellow Miskitos (indeed, it is cast in doubt), or how this plan for sovereignty will impact on other, non-Miskito indigenous persons on the Caribbean coast of the country, as well as non-indigenous Nicaraguans. We are told, however, that they have a flag and an anthem.

Gibbs suggests that the main reason for the proclamation of independence is primarily economic: outrageously high unemployment of 80% in some parts, while oil drilling concessions in the area are being offered, and the fact that those employed on government-licensed lobster fishing vessels have seen their wages cut.

The Miskitos were allied with the British throughout the 1700s and 1800s. In the 1980s, many joined and supported the US-funded and equipped contras, fighting against the Sandinista Revolution. The president at the time, Daniel Ortega, is once again the president, and the article provides no indication of any response from him. The Sandinista government in the 1980s was the first in the Americas to produce an ambitious autonomy plan for the so-called "Atlantic Coast" region.

Bolivia: Universities for Indigenous Peoples

This story was published by the Latin American Herald Tribune, 12 August 2009:

LA PAZ – The three universities for indigenous peoples promoted by the government of Evo Morales began their activities with a total of 480 students, Bolivia’s Education Ministry said in a communique.

The students, who were selected in indigenous communities and will be able to take advantages of scholarships, began their studies Monday at what Education Minister Roberto Aguilar called an “historic moment for the educational and university environment.”

Aguilar made his remarks on Sunday at the official inauguration of the Guarani-language university at Kuruyuki in the southeastern province of Chuquisaca, which will bear the name of indigenous hero Apiaguaiki Tumpa.

In the town of Chimore will be a Quechua-language institution with the name of Casimiro Huanca.

The other university, Tupac Katari, will be established in the Andean town of Warisata, near La Paz, where the medium of instruction will be the Aymara language.

The indigenous universities “will open up (for the students) not only the Western and universal world of knowledge, but the knowledge of our own identity, culture; without leaving to the side the hope and yearning of the peoples” said the education minister.

Therefore, he urged the students to take advantage of their classes to transfer the knowledge they acquire to their communities.

“You have the right to educate yourselves as part of the right of peoples. It’s a right won with blood and sacrifice,” said Aguilar.

Morales, an Aymara, is the first indigenous president of Bolivia, where Indians make up around 60 percent of the population of nearly 10 million. EFE

U.N. Secretary General on International Day of World's Indigenous People

The following was the statement issued by United Nations Secretary General, Ban Ki-moon, on the occasion of the International Day of the World's Indigenous People, observed this past 09 August 2009:

The world’s indigenous peoples – 370 million in 70 countries -- are the custodians of some of the most biologically diverse areas on earth. They speak a majority of the world’s languages, and their traditional knowledge, cultural diversity and sustainable ways of life make an invaluable contribution to the world’s common heritage.

The adoption of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples by the General Assembly in 2007 was a landmark in the struggle of indigenous peoples for justice, equal rights and development. There have also been recent welcome steps at the national level; some governments have apologized to indigenous peoples for past injustices, and others have advanced legislative and constitutional reforms.

Still, indigenous peoples remain some of the most marginalized populations, suffering disproportionately from poverty and inadequate access to education. Many face discrimination and racism on a daily basis. All too often, their languages face strictures or are threatened with extinction, while their territories are sacrificed for mining and deforestation.

Indigenous peoples also tend to suffer from the low standards of health associated with poverty, malnutrition, environmental contamination and inadequate healthcare. With that in mind, this year’s observance of the International Day focuses on the threat of HIV/AIDS. It is essential that indigenous peoples have access to the information and infrastructure necessary for detection, treatment and protection.

Insufficient progress in health, in particular, points to a persistent and profound gap in many countries between the formal recognition of indigenous peoples’ rights and the actual situation on the ground. On this International Day, I call on Governments and civil society to act with urgency and determination to close this implementation gap, in full partnership with indigenous peoples.

Ban Ki-moon

YOU ARE ON INDIAN LAND

You Are on Indian Land

Mort Ransen, 1969, 36 min 48 s

The film shows the confrontation between police and a 1969 demonstration by Mohawks of the St. Regis Reserve on the ...
[ more ]

The film shows the confrontation between police and a 1969 demonstration by Mohawks of the St. Regis Reserve on the bridge between Canada and the United States near Cornwall, Ontario. By blocking traffic on the bridge, which is on the Reserve, the Indians drew public attention to their grievance that they were prohibited by Canadian authorities from duty-free passage of personal purchases across the border, a right they claim was established by the Jay Treaty of 1794.

Kanehsatake: 270 Years of Resistance

Kanehsatake 270 Years of Resistance

Alanis Obomsawin, 1993, 119 min 15 s

On a July day in 1990, a confrontation propelled Native issues in Kanehsatake and the village of Oka, Quebec, into ...
[ more ]

On a July day in 1990, a confrontation propelled Native issues in Kanehsatake and the village of Oka, Quebec, into the international spotlight. Director Alanis Obomsawin spent 78 nerve-wracking days and nights filming the armed stand-off between the Mohawks, the Quebec police and the Canadian army. This powerful documentary takes you right into the action of an age-old Aboriginal struggle. The result is a portrait of the people behind the barricades.

UC Berkeley Begins Destruction of Native American Sacred Site

Thanks again to Tony Castanha for passing this along:

BERKELEY, CA- University of California police moved in yesterday morning and cut many limbs and branches of a Redwood tree and cut down twelve Oak trees that have been protected by tree-sitting protesters for the last 21 months. Five people were arrested as they peacefully pleaded with arborists not to destroying the trees of the Memorial Oak Grove deemed a sacred burial site to Ohlone Indians.

Twelve trees were cut today and the University says they will continue cutting 46 over the weekend. Four protesters remain in a single Redwood tree in the center of the grove. Arborists trimmed most of the branches from the Redwood tree occupied by the four remaining tree sitters. Cutting the branches made it virtually impossible for the tree sitters to move from tree to tree. A spokesman for the campus said that within three days, the University would no longer honor its agreement to ensure they had adequate nutrition and water. The tree sitters currently only have one liter of water to share between four people as they sit in 90 degree heat.

The Memorial Oak Grove is regarded as a sacred place to Native American people and is documented as such by UC Berkeley's own Anthropology Department. There is evidence of 2 shell mounds sites in the area, with 19 ancestral remains found within them. Along with UC Berkeley's attempt to develop on a sacred place, they are guilty of housing over 17,000 sacred remains and objects. UCB currently holds the largest human remains collection in the United States of which it is not in compliance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA)

"I brought my five year old daughter and two month old son out today to bear witness to the massacre of sacred life," said Morning Star Gali of the Pit River Tribe and co-chair of Advocates to Protect Sacred Sites. "The cops responded by yelling to move them behind the median. I asked if they would stand by as complacent if it was their grandmother' s gravesites being desecrated. I want my children here to witness the destruction of sacred life and how important it is to protect it. I wanted them to witness the cops, arborists and UC Officials that participated and cheered as the trees came crashing down from bulldozers. This exhibits the ongoing Human Rights abuses committed by the University. They refuse to comply with NAGPRA by holding 13,000 of our ancestors remains hostage, they illegally reorganized NAGPRA with no tribal consultation and now they continue to desecrate sacred burial grounds."

The Memorial Grove is a native Coast Live Oak ecosystem. Native oaks support the most complex terrestrial ecosystems in California. The California Native Plant Society CNPS has stated that the Memorial Oak Grove is "an important gene bank for the Coast Live Oak." Every one of the oaks in the grove should be protect by law and the Berkeley Coast Live Oak moratorium forbids cutting mature Coast Live Oaks in Berkeley. UC refuses to recognize the law. The grove is also part of a National Historic Site. The Stadium and landscape is a memorial to Californians who died in World War I.

The tree sitters are urging people to come and show support for the trees and bear witness to the University of California's blatant disregard to sacred sites and native ecosystems.

Letter from Leonard Peltier

Many thanks to Tony Castanha for forwarding this:

AUGUST 24, 2008

Greetings my friends and relatives,

First of all, I can't express to you, near as much as I'd like to. The sincere appreciation I have that you would gather together remembering all the political prisoners, hostages and myself the way you have.

Gatherings like this are extremely important because it reminds people of the sacrifices that are made daily through out the world for freedom, justice, and a clean and sane environment for our future generations. The powers that exploit our resources and people will always be there, generation after generation.

And the creator will always call upon people to stand against that exploitation. Even if the creator does not call. Any just man or woman, with any semblance of justice, be it spiritual, social or environmental, He will find cause to take issue with those enemies of humanity and nature.

One of the reasons I am so appreciative is because I want you to know, from where I stand the gatherings that you do mean so very very much to the other political prisoners, other hostages and myself. It is an extreme importance that political prisoners and hostages not be forgotten. Not necessarily for the sake of the prisoners and hostages themselves, but for the sake of future generations. To appreciate and protect and jealously guard the freedoms they possess; that was paid for with someone's life. I think the most difficult times for a political prisoner or hostage, is when people start to forget what their sacrifice was about, when people become complacent because of some economic level they have attained, and forget the sacrifices that were made and the danger of them losing those gains is imminent. And I know from personal experience, the joy I feel when I receive letters of appreciations or visitors and that is second to the joy I feel when I know that my efforts were not in vain. And there are young people taking up the cause and responsibility of regaining our lost freedoms and resources.

I dearly miss the touch of friends, I dearly miss walking through a forest or across a meadow or even through the traffic of a busy street, or feeling the wind blowing against my skin, directly, rather than a window or some chain link fence.

But with all this, I can't express to you how at a great loss I would feel if the reason and cause of the many political prisoners and hostages throughout the world was forgotten. Swept aside, because people become too comfortable with their status quo.

I have been here for 33 years that is more than half of my life. I would give almost anything to go home. But I won't give up,

I would give almost anything to be with my family. But I won't be quiet.

I would give almost anything to say goodbye to this place, but I won't say goodbye to my beliefs and our struggle.

I would give almost anything to walk out this door and never return. But I will never walk away from the love of my people.

When I think of the things that I hear and see in the media, about how many different special interest groups, speak of various subjects, like the right to live, or pro-life, I cant help but think, of the children around the world, who never get a chance to live because of the exploitation of their resources of their country and their people.

All of the destruction that is taking place here and abroad is a direct result of people, special interest groups, whose interest is primarily wealth and taking more than they need.

The religious people or should I say The spiritual people of America, and anywhere else for that matter, should seek to aggressively band together to stop the unjust wars that truly impact primarily the common man, the common man who in his village or farm, city or anywhere else is destroyed, by bombs, from the various governments. Governments; Who in the name of nationalism and patriotism seek to gain political power and control over someone else's resource and political system. They should actively band together and identify the things they have in common rather than dwelling on their differences. Perhaps I am rambling too much in my statement, after 33 years in prison and 63 years upon this earth, much of this time spent thinking, praying, analyzing, and mediating, on the information that I gather from various forms of writings, books and observations, I somehow feel I have a little bit of a right, to say what I think and feel.

I love you all and I am so honored that I would be invited to make a statement to you. And if I could hug each one of you individually, I guarantee you would damn well be hugged!

I have never given up in my struggle for freedom.

Freedom is a natural inclination of all living creatures up on the earth. Even a newborn will struggle when held too tightly.

I deeply regret being in prison I deeply regret losing family members while in here, I deeply regret all the wonderful things in life that I have missed, but I will never regret standing up for my people for as long as I can draw my breath. My heart is with them always, and my heart is with you today.

So long for now; I will remember you in my prayers and until next time.

Keep the faith.

Your relative always

In the spirit of crazy horse,

Leonard Peltier

HTTP://WWW.WHOISLEONARDPELTIER.INFO

Guyana's Indigenous Peoples on the Periphery

An article in The Guyana Review titled, "Guyana's Indigenous Peoples: Still Languishing on the Periphery" (posted May 28, 2008) features an interview with David James, the former head of the Amerindian Peoples' Association (APA).

David James, who is the legal adviser to the APA, outlines some of the shock being suffered by indigenous communities in the face of the invasion by loggers and miners, and foreign corporations:

Those communities that have borne the brunt of the environmental damage are very resentful. They are resentful of the social effects of mining and timber harvesting – especially mining – which include the introduction of large amounts of alcohol, illicit drugs and prostitution camps. These activities take place either within the mining areas or close to the mining areas.

There are cases in which some communities are so resentful of these practices that they have sought legal redress. There are at least three cases that I am aware of where communities have initiated legal action to protect their rights. The success in these cases has been limited primarily because the court process is very slow.

What the communities feel is that their protection is best assured through the granting of full rights including sub—surface rights. This would mean that they would have full ownership of the resources and better control of those resources. Of course access also means that they would benefit from those resources.

James also describes the many ways that the rights of indigenous communities have been severely undermined by natural resource development, and the limited recourse they have under the law, especially as they do not possess rights to that which lies beneath the soil they live on. James calls for a revision of Guyana's Amerindian Act to bring it in line with the government's own endorsement of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples:

There is a need for the Amerindian Act to be amended particularly because in 2007 the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples was approved by the General Assembly. That Declaration ought to be the guide for legislative reform in any country. The Amerindian Act was passed before that Declaration was approved but the approval of that Declaration essentially means that those states that have voted for it are saying that they consent to abide by its very lofty principles. Therefore, the Amerindian Act as it stands now falls far short of many of the rights standards that are contained in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

James ends the interview by describing the overall environment of confrontation between indigenous communities and the state. To the extent that earning foreign exchange to help purchase foreign imports continues to be the dominant developmentalist logic in Guyana, I don't think James is wrong in showing a lack of optimism for the future.

UNDOING COLUMBUS FROM THE CENTRE: Italian Day of Remembrance for the Genocide of Indigenous Peoples

ESTABLISHING MANIFESTO OF THE 11 OCTOBER COMMITTEE
for the institution of the
Remembrance Day of the Genocide of Indigenous Peoples

In the age of “forced” globalization, in which we are lead to think of as inevitable the progressive and inexorable homogenization of cultures and people, it is fundamental to give voice to all the native nations which even today, despite centuries of physical and cultural genocide, keep on existing and affirming a different way to relate to Mother Earth.

The 11 October Committee, formed by Italian groups and associations fighting for a long time for the self-determination right of the indigenous people all over the world, was constituted in Genoa on April the 13th 2008 with the purpose of spreading the knowledge of a different history from that written by the winners and to promote support initiatives to all the claims that nowadays native people laboriously undertake.

Therefore we think it is necessary to start from the awareness that a gold paved road, “discovered” by the colonizers, corresponds to another, one of tears and blood, suffered by the colonized. The metaphor can appear strong but it’s a fact, given that we are remembering a genocide perpetrated upon millions of people and thousands of nations and cultures. Today there’s no point in focusing attention and analysis on what has happened in the past, and furthermore indigenous people don't want it; however to ignore history doesn't produce pacification but grudges.

The possibility to build a future founded upon a true relationship of respect and mutual meeting has to start from the recognition of what has happened, and still keeps happening today to native people all over the world, from Botswana to Tibet, from America to Oceania.

To such aims the 11 October Committee proposes to realize, on October the 11th and 12th 2008, two days of meetings and cultural events focused on native peoples resistance, meant as proud maintenance of their own dignity and cultural identity.

The intention of the Committee is to propose the continuation of this initiative in the next years, giving voice to native peoples with the intent of beginning an exchange of thoughts, traditions and values amongst the cultures.

In this first gathering, several exponents of the American native culture (writers, artists, dancers) will be the protagonists of the events and will bear witness to how much their own culture is still alive today and to how it is important to “positively” realize autonomous spaces of sovereignty and self-determination as foreseen by the ILO 169 Convention and from the Declaration of the Indigenous People Rights recently approved by the United Nations.

For these reasons, the 11 October Committee is actively promoting a campaign insisting that the Italian government adhere to and ratify the ILO 169 Convention, which is the unique binding international juridical tool upon which native and tribal peoples can rely on in order to obtain the recognition of their rights.

Finally the event will represent the occasion to launch a campaign to ask the Italian Parliament to establish a “Remembrance Day of the Genocide of Native Peoples” on October the 11th.

The choice of this date seeks to remember, in a symbolic way, the last day of freedom of the American Indigenous People, with the hope that the broken circle can be recomposed for future generations.

Adherents to the 11 October Committee:

Associazione ECOcentrici (Roma)
Associazione A SUD (Roma)
Coordinamento Ligure Donne Latino Americane (Genova)
Coordinamento per la Difesa di M. Graham (Modena)
Associazione Gaia Terra (Roma)
Associazione Huka Hey (Pordenone)
Associazione Hunkapi (Genova)
Associazione Il Cerchio (Italian indigenous people supporter network)
Associazione Kiwani-Il Risveglio (Firenze)
Associazione Soconas Incomindios (Torino)
Associazione Wambli Glesca (Ravenna)
Gruppo Heyata (Vicenza)
Associazione Sesto Sole (Bergamo)
Associazione ECO Mapuche (Como)

Supported by:
NATIVI AMERICANI . IT

Call for Support for the Algonquin community of Barriere Lake, Quebec

Sun Aug 3, 2008

A CALL FOR ENDORSEMENTS AND SOLIDARITY

Dear friends and allies --

As you might know, in March the Algonquin community of Barriere Lake, located 400 kms north of Montreal, Quebec, had their Customary Chief and Council deposed by the Canadian government, with support from the Quebec government, in an attempt to get out of binding agreements signed with the community.

This is only the latest chapter in Barriere Lake's long struggle to wrest control over their lives and lands from governments and corporations. In 1991, Barriere Lake compelled Canada and Quebec to sign a groundbreaking land management and sustainable development agreement, after a campaign of civil disobedience that caught international attention. The Trilateral agreement set important precedents: it would give Barriere Lake decisive say in the management of 10,000 square kilometers of their traditional territory, protect Algonquin land uses, and give them a share in the resource-revenue from logging and hydro projects on their land.

Praised by the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples, the agreement was an alternative to the Comprehensive Land Claims process, which Barriere Lake rejected because it would force them to extinguish their Aboriginal title and rights, among other reasons.

The federal and provincial governments never liked the agreement, and have tried everything to undermine it – including the unilateral leadership change in March. It's the third time in the past 12 years that the government has refused to recognize the legitimate community leadership. Today, the agreement remains unimplemented.

For background and information on Barriere Lake:
http://www.barrierelakesolidarity.blogspot.com/

Though a small community with few resources, Barriere Lake has demonstrated remarkable tenacity in their struggle for self-determination and the protection of their culture and land. But it is a struggle that can only succeed with broad support and solidarity from non-native people.

The Barriere Lake Solidarity collective in Montreal, taking direction from Barriere Lake, is looking for groups and organizations to ENDORSE THE COMMUNITY'S LIST OF DEMANDS in order to build pressure on the federal and provincial government.

Email us if you can: barrierelakesolidarity@gmail.com

Barriere Lake's List of Demands

1. That the Government of Canada agree to respect the outcome of a new leadership re-selection process, with outside observers, recognize the resulting Customary Chief and Council, and cease all interference in the internal governance of Barriere Lake.

2. That the Government of Canada agree to the immediate incorporation of an Algonquin language and culture program into the primary school curriculum.

3. That the Government of Canada honour signed agreements with Barriere Lake, including the Trilateral, the Memorandum of Mutual Intent, and the Special Provisions, all of which it has illegally terminated.

4. That the Government of Canada revoke Third Party Management, which was imposed unjustly on Barriere Lake.

5. That the Province of Quebec honour signed agreements with Barriere Lake, including the 1991 Trilateral and 1998 Bilateral agreements, and adopt for implementation the Lincoln-Ciaccia joint recommendations, including $1.5 million in resource-revenue sharing.

6. That the Government of Canada and the Province of Quebec initiate a judicial inquiry into the Quebec Regional Office of the Department of Indian Affairs' treatment of Barriere Lake and other First Nations who may request to be included.

7. That the Government of Quebec, in consultation with First Nations, conduct a review of the recommendations of the Ontario Ipperwash Commission for guidance towards improving Quebec-First Nation relations and the SQ's procedures during policing of First Nation communities.

------
Apart from ENDORSEMENTS, we are seeking other forms of support:

**Consider getting INVOLVED in our campaign – as a group, or as an individual – during the upcoming months.

**Consider making a DONATION, to support Barriere Lake's needs and to help with our mobilization efforts. Contact us by e-mail to make a donation, or donate directly to Barriere Lake through our website.
http://barrierelakesolidarity.blogspot.com/
2008/03/donations.html

**If you want UPDATES, we can add you to an email list to notify you about upcoming events and actions. Just email
barrierelakesolidarity@gmail.com

-- the Barriere Lake Solidarity collective