I will admit I am not quite sure what I expected when I decided to go to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights hearing: Human Rights Situation of Indigenous Persons in the Context of Projects and Extractive Industries in the United States. However it was suggested by tribal leaders that if folks could go they should, so with that in mind I went.
I know I wanted to hear from the many tribes that are affected by extractive industries and I wanted to hear from the water protectors at the resistant camp at Standing Rock. I wanted to see them face to face with representatives of the United States and its federal agencies. And I wanted to believe that the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights would be addressed respectfully by the US and all of her federal agencies.
But of course they weren’t because ‘Merica. All the regulatory documents referred to during the hearing were as Kevin Sullivan, the U.S Deputy Permanent Representative to the Organization of American States, made very clear more than once “not legally binding”. The American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man was mentioned several times and I’ll admit I had never heard of it before. After close inspection I will say that much like the Declaration of Independence it is inspiring and not legally binding.
So imagine with me, if you will, a hearing where a person — lets pretend its a white man, maybe he is a mayor of a small town — refers to the Declaration of Independence as he argues for the rights of the people in his small town to protect their drinking water. And a representative from the federal government, maybe the Department of the Interior, starts his response by stating, just so everyone is clear, “The Declaration of Independence is not legally binding”.
Hopefully that helps give you a sense of how this “conversation” in regards to Kevin Sullivan, the U.S Deputy Permanent Representative to the Organization of American States, aka the guy tasked with interfacing with OAS went. It gave me the sense that his job description goes something like — make sure that the OAS knows we could give two fucks and have no respect for them or any authority they claim to have, but say it more nice with a heavy focus on semantics.
That also happens to be how indigenous peoples are addressed so this particular hearing dovetailed nicely into Sullivans profressional wheelhouse. As Kevin Sullivan pointed out twice, this was a “thematic hearing” so he could not (translation would not) recognize the tribal leaders as petitioners in regards to the specific complaints they brought about use of force against the water protectors at Standing Rock. This hearing was about a theme. Today’s theme was The United States of America doesn’t respect the sovereignty, authority, opinions, or rights of the indigenous nations of North America but will pay them lip service via treaties, agreements and acts, none of which are ever followed. Because: “not legally binding”.
To their credit, Gina Allery, Deputy Director of the Office of Tribunal Justice at the Department of Justice, Chip Smith, the Assistant for Environment, Tribal and Regulatory Affairs, Department of the Army (Civil Works) at the Department of Defense and Valerie Hauser, the Director of Native America Affairs at the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation seemed simultaneously used to and adverse to the disrespect that Kevin Sullivan showed the tribal leaders. They used their statements to thank and reassure the tribal leaders that they would continue in their personal and organizational efforts to remedy the situation which tribal leaders described for the OAS leadership.
Councilmember Chad Harrison of Standing Rock Sioux Tribe summarized “Corporations interests are given highest priority while sovereign nations are given lip service.” The ways this manifests range from a U.S. court system that relies on the the most restrictive interpretation of Federal Indian Law (so binding but up to interpretation?) to the United States inability to implement an appropriate framework according to international human rights standards (remember not binding!) to ensure that any actions that affect traditional lands and resources of indigenous people, including the right to free prior and informed consent and or legal redress for indigenous people to protect human rights in the context of infrastructure process. So his request was for the most powerful nation in the world to figure that out, starting with training for elected officials and federal employees on the written agreements between the United States and sovereign indigenous nations as well as international human rights law. Without that DAPL will happen again, as it has in the past, and next time, like all the other times, the American people may not ever even hear about it.
Harold Frazier of the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe made it clear for the OSA board that the Standing Rock Camp was under siege. He reiterated that Indigenous people had no rights. He referenced a conversation he has with Colonel Henderson from the Army Corp of Engineers regarding the need for protections for the water protectors. Colonel Henderson explicitly said that as long as they were on federal land they would be protected and only two days later he signed off on attacks on the water protectors. And what can be done? Nothing, there is no mechanism of accountability available to the indigenous peoples when incidents like this occur. During this DAPL fight they were not listened to, they were harassed, silenced and too often procedural decisions were based on what the police said not the people of the resistance camp. “We are there to protect our clean water, not incite violence.”
Steve Vance is the Tribal Historic Preservation Officer for the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe and was involved with protecting that which is sacred and historical during the DAPL fight. He described the destruction of his tribes history which is it’s future. They still do their ceremonies and speak their language and those sites have been and are being destroyed. They aren't going to have anything to pass to the next generation and its is threatening their very existence. The U.S. criticizes other countries for this behavior and yet it is happening here. Steve’s final question was simple: “Who protects our human rights?”
Robert Pynal remained on that same train of thought and asked the panel and the U.S. representatives to “Look at our rights as human beings. We have treaties and documents with the US that says we have rights and we are people.” He then asked why was the pipeline moved from Bismarck if it is so safe? His conclusion: “Because when it breaks it is going to contaminate our water.”
Faith Spotted Eagle from the Yankton Sioux very powerfully discussed the escalation of historical trauma that is occurring at the site. Rape culture that patriarchal systems abide by means that the rape of mother earth is the rape of women and what has resulted from this is an escalation of violence at the Standing Rock which is unsafe for the women. After describing how the tee pee’s seen at the camp represents a woman and a skirt. The 13th pole is the woman's pole and that symbolizes the protection of the family. Now they are having to protect their families from U.S. laws that have been weaponized for corporate gain by extractive industries. Faith Spotted Eagle concluded by referring to Article 24 26 and 19 of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights where indigenous people have the right to their own cultural resources.
Cue Kevin Sullivan, who responded to the very clear testimonies of the tribal leaders by speaking about them as if they were not present, and highlighting legal loopholes in their complaints. It was disappointing as I describe above.
And now I know why tribal leaders said if folks could go they should. For many Americans, myself being one of them, we have a very different interaction with the American government and see them as a protective agent in our life. But that is because we are white. To hear how the indigenous people of this country are spoken to and about reminded me of this point. This is a system of oppression that is historical, systematic and ever present. It is one that together we can dismantle, and it starts with standing for Indigenous people of this country. Until we are all free, none of us are. This is my fight. This is your fight. And I am hopeful that the progressive community will continue to stand up and resist the destruction of indigenous peoples heritage and the land which we all call home. We may even be able to “reach across the aisle” and include more conservative folks as well. We can not see this as a partisan issue. We can not see the recent No DAPL win as a final chapter and move on. We can not decide that something else is more important now and take resources away from standing with Standing Rock. To do so is to undermine any progressive gains we hope to make for our children and to disrespect our own proclaimed values.