Let's see what a little "Let's Talk Native...with John Kane" at the UN stirs up.
Wednesday, May 7, 2014
Lucky 13 for the UNPFII
On May 12, the United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous
Issues (UNPFII) will begin its 13th session at the United Nations in New York
City. The session will run for two weeks and cover a broad range of topics.
The event is not open to the public. Only confirmed and
registered NGO and IPO representatives are allowed to participate. However, as
a UN accredited member of the media, I will be there, too. Yeah, that's right.
Two Row Times columnist and radio show host John Kane will be there having the
conversations that may or may not be welcome.
Now I'm not among the starry-eyed devotees of the UN. I am a
skeptic although I appreciate the good intentions of such a body and even the
nice words assembled in the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples
(UNDRIP). But intentions are not actions and the UNDRIP clearly identifies
itself as the minimum standards that the world holds for the rights of Indigenous
peoples. And while I understand the most common denominator for the nations of
the world would almost have to accept a minimum standard, this Mohawk certainly
doesn't.
Of course, the U.S. and Canada, the last UN nations to
conditionally endorse the Declaration, could not even accept this minimum
standard at face value but rather suggested they could only support the "aspirations"
of the document provided that its articles do not conflict with U.S. or
Canadian law, which kind of misses the point. Uh...if your laws conflict with
the UNDRIP, which they certainly do, as well as your policies, propaganda,
altered history, religions, schools and state sponsored racism, then you
obviously are not really supporting what the rest of entire world has endorsed.
So why go? Simple. Shame.
I have made it my mission to encourage conversations on
Native issues. The more conversations that are had, the brighter the spotlight
shines on those issues. If it is nothing else, I see the UN as a grand stage
for conversations. But because the U.S. and Canada fail miserably by almost any
standard for compliance with the UNDRIP and because they have no intentions of
complying, our best recourse is the "court of public opinion" and
shame on that grand stage.
One of the biggest mistakes we make in fighting for our
inherent rights is treating them as gifts from our oppressors. Our rights are
neither "treaty rights" nor are they UN Declaration rights. They are
unalienable, inherent and original. Treaties may acknowledge them or even
suggest protection of them but they do not grant them. The UNDRIP makes no claim
to be the origins of our rights either. This declaration simply reiterates much
of the UN Declaration on Human Rights with certain other obvious international
standards such as "free, prior and informed consent" from people
affected by the actions of another. The UNDRIP recognizes rights. It does not
establish them.
Our job begins with asserting our inalienable rights based on
our inherent sovereignty. The language in their treaties may be used to
demonstrate and remind those that would violate our rights how many times they
acknowledged their limitations and just how little we ever really ceded to them
regarding our rights and liberties. The same goes for the UNDRIP. But unlike
all those treaties that our people were coerced into, for access to our lands,
the Declaration is not a quid pro quo
or a this for a that. It is simply a minimum standard. But it is pointless if
it is unknown or never cited.
So while our job begins with asserting our rights, it is also
incredibly important to specifically cite how and where our rights are being
violated within the context of the UNDRIP and our inherent sovereignty. We need
to make the violators of those rights painfully clear of the international
standards they are ignoring and alert the international community of the
violations and impacts, as well. There are 46 articles and a preamble loaded
with affirmations, acknowledgements, concerns, beliefs and specific points of
recognition to which we should hold the non-Native governments and do so with
every intent of leveling shame and embarrassment on these U.S. and Canadian hypocrites.
The opening day of the UNPFII, among other issues, is
scheduled to cover sexual health and reproductive rights. With more than 1,000
missing and murdered Native women in Canada alone and the highest rate of
childbirth mortality rates on the continent, how can the U.S. and Canada not be
shamed?
The second day will focus on the impacts of the Doctrine of
Christian Discovery. This can't be just a study of past atrocities but must
include the ongoing ones, as well. The U.S. codified this racist doctrine in
1823 and it is still cited to this day to diminish everything from claims to
our stolen lands to our right to trade and develop our own economies. This
can't just be about condemning ugly history as though it's all better now. It
isn't! The suggestion that our "discovery" by Christian nations
equated to conquest is not just wrong today. It was just as wrong when the
house of cards that is "federal Indian law" was built on it then. The
UNDRIP should assist us in securing more equitable remedies, not just for past
grievances but current conflicts, too. The U.S. and Canada can keep their
"houses of cards" but if they don't want it toppled they should keep
us out of it. There is no shame in fairly and respectfully resolving conflict
but any nation claiming superiority based on race or religion should be truly
embarrassed.
Redress, land disputes and land claims, Indigenous children
and Indigenous youth, and actual implementation of the UNDRIP are other
scheduled topics for discussion. And I will take every opportunity I can to
bend the ear of anyone that will listen to address the most critical issues to
our people — poverty today and bleak prospects for the future.
All the access to sacred sites in the world can't fix poverty
and self-esteem. All the special days, decades and declarations the world over
will not secure a future for our unborn faces. We don't need world courts or
international sanctions. We need real international relations that support our
trade, our travel and our autonomy. We need interface between the voices that
call for our right to be respected and protected, and those whose laws fly in
the face of those calls.
Let's see what a little "Let's Talk Native...with John Kane" at the UN stirs up.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment