DOCUMENT: UNCWIS88.TXT U N I T E D N A T I O N S WORKING GROUP ON INDIGENOUS POPULATIONS SIXTH SESSION, AUGUST 1988 GENEVA EVOLUTION OF STANDARDS CONCERNING THE RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS POPULATIONS AGENDA ITEM 6 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Statement in reference to the Study on the Significance of Indigenous Treaties presented by Rudolph C. Ryser Copyright (c) 1988 Center For World Indigenous Studies [Ed. Note: This article may be reproduced for electronic transfer and posting on computer bulletin boards in part or full, provided that no profit is made by such transfer and that full credit is given to the author, the Center For World Indigenous Studies and The Fourth World Documentation Project.] Mr. Chairman, I thank you and the members of the Working Group for this opportunity to comment on the proposal to undertake a Study of the Significance of Indigenous Treaties and agreements and other constructive arrangements between states and indigenous nations. As Mr. Chairman may recall, in previous sessions of this Working Group, we have attempted to bring before you growing evidence that relations between indigenous nations and states are rapidly deteriorating. We have noted in the past that the level of overt violence between nations and states continues to escalate with no clear possibilities of resolution yet apparent. I am unhappy to report this year that the total number of sustained violent confrontations in the world is now 120. Of these conflicts, 82 involve indigenous nations as combatants. As a result of the Center For World Indigenous Studies inquiries, we find that virtually all of the violent confrontations between indigenous nations and states concern territorial jurisdiction and the competing use of natural resources. We also find that nearly all of these conflicts could be peacefully resolved through negotiations between the combating parties. Despite the fact that negotiated settlements could resolve the disputes between indigenous nations and states governments, the use of treaties as a means of resolving these disputes peacefully is limited. The failure of states governments and nations to seek negotiations as a means of dispute resolution is strongly indicated as the principal reason for sustained violence and war between indigenous nations and states. Indigenous nations have a long and constructive history of negotiating treaties and agreements between themselves. States have also a history of negotiating treaties and agreements between themselves to resolve disputes. There is also considerable evidence that indigenous nations and states have a history of treaty-making. Despite the extensive building of international treaty relations involving both nations and states there appears to be a growing reluctance now to continue to build on treaty relations to resolve modern disputes. The proposal to undertake a Study of the Significance of Indigenous Treaties as a part of the broader process of Standard Setting should be strongly endorsed by all who seek to promote a more peaceful world. Mr. Chairman, it is no accident that we describe the codes which guide world relations INTERNATIONAL LAW. It is this body of rules between nations which contributes to the efforts toward a more peaceful and orderly world. Indigenous nations have long been contributors to the formulation of international law. It is due to a curious twist of history that the nations which created the rules for conducting world relations now sit as informal observers at meetings like this. Nations are not full participants in world bodies like the United Nations organizations. It is a curious turn that nations are now called "indigenous populations" and states stand in judgement of their parents. Indigenous nations were the first to order relations on a global scale. States are only recent participants. Both nations and states exist, but they do not now share equally in the responsibility for building new international law. Indigenous nations and states must now come together and work as equal partners in the maintenance of global peace. Despite opinions to the contrary, there is an unspoken question before the United Nations and this Working Group in connection with indigenous nations. It is the same question considered by the League of Nations in 1919. The question; WHAT IS THE CURRENT AND FUTURE POLITICAL STATUS OF UNCONSENTING NATIONS WHICH HAVE COME UNDER THE CONTROL OF A STATE? The League of Nations squarely addressed the question of subjugated nations and noted there were two types of colonized peoples. There are those peoples who are under the control of a foreign state distant from a colonizing power's borders. League of Nations conferees recognized there are also peoples who are colonized inside the boundaries of a state. Members said that just as peoples outside a state's boundaries were colonized, people inside state boundaries may be colonized. League members eventually agreed that colonized nations outside state boundaries should freely exercise self-determination and govern themselves. Many states, however, objected to consideration of self- determination for nations inside state boundaries. These states feared what might happen to their state structures if nations were permitted the opportunity to choose freely their political future. State fears of loosing control over economic resources and political power set aside the issue of decolonizing nations inside state boundaries. By this decision, the League of Nations contributed to the increased number of violent conflicts between indigenous nations and states. The league lit the fuse for protracted struggles between nations and states -- struggles which continue today. The work of the League of Nations and the outcome of two World Wars laid the basis for what the Working Group is considering now. The basic concepts which established the League of Nations, however, reflected a desire for balanced relations between nations and states. In 1918, President of the United States of America Woodrow Wilson delivered his _Fourteen Points_ speech. He set the foundation for our current thinking on Self-Determination when he presented Point Five of his speech. He said there must be a: free open-minded, and absolutely impartial adjustment of all colonial claims, based upon a strict observance of the principle that in determining all such questions of sovereignty the interest of the population concerned must have equal weight with the equitable claims of the Government whose title is to be determined. Such a concept must play a role in our thinking in connection with the treaty study. Events of the last forty years would seem to indicate, global peace and security depends on balanced relations between nations and states. Global stability depends on the free, open-minded and absolutely impartial adjustment of colonized nations' and state claims. Since 1947, more lives have been lost, wealth expended and more people have become refugees than during both World War I and World War II combined. Since the end of World War II, we have lived the illusion of peace. The reality is the most bloody of world wars. Engaged in this war are nations seeking to be free, and many states seeking to deny their freedom. Why has the carnage continued despite the many declarations on Human Rights? There are two principle reasons: First, nations which control states need permanence of the state system to be sure of their own constant dominance over other nations. Secondly, states formed by immigrant populations wish to maintain their control over nations and territories which they earlier colonized. The result is that many nations remain under the forced and colonial control of a small number of states. States exhibit a fear of nations, and they fear the expression of nationalism when it is not in support of the state. States claim nations are the source of instability, conflict and division. States claim that it is they who bring stability and peace to the world. It doesn't take a wizard, Mr. Chairman, to recognize that the current world conflicts, and both World Wars were produced by states. Indeed, the threat of global nuclear annihilation is the product of two centralized states. States and nations must now seek peaceful solutions to their differences. Indeed, some nations have urged the negotiations of peace treaties with states, but states have demonstrated a general unwillingness. Despite commitments under the U.N. Charter to seek peaceful solutions to disputes, many states still will not negotiate peaceful settlements with nations. Some states fear that peace with nations means dismemberment of the state. They believe that when nations speak of self-determination, this means the break-up of the state. Note, if you will, the U.N. Declaration of Friendly Relations and Cooperation Among States which came into force in 1970. Here, states appear to be circling the wagons against a perceived threat from colonized nations: "Nothing in the foregoing paragraphs shall be construed as authorizing or encouraging any action which would dismember or impair, totally or in part the territorial integrity or political unity of sovereign and independent states...." Mr. Chairman, this phrase has been invoked by observer state delegations with increasing frequency during the proceedings of the Working Group. By invoking this declaration, state observer delegations seem increasingly interested in closing off discussions on the self-determination of indigenous nations. Instead of free and open-minded dialogue, some delegations seem eager to hide behind a U.N. declaration contrived by states to deny nations their right to self- determination. Obstructionism and denials in these proceedings do not contribute to the resolution of what is a world-wide phenomenon of conflict between indigenous nations and states. If the proceedings of the U.N. Working Group on Indigenous Populations demonstrate anything, they show that indigenous nations will resist aggressions. Nations will resist colonization. Though they may suffer from terrifying war weapons, and they suffer from economic, and political and social interference, nations will resist. The most important issue between indigenous nations and states is the future political issue between indigenous nations and the establishment of mutually acceptable methods for resolving disputes. While both indigenous nations and states seek to guarantee their sovereignty, there must be an acceptable process for bringing disputes to an end. The Working Group can help reduce tensions, and increase the prospect of political settlements by addressing the issue of nations' political status as a part of the study. The Working Group can further help reduce tensions by providing a systematic study into the status of existing treaties and agreements between indigenous nations and states; and by promoting the further inquiry into methods for improving treaty settlements of conflicts between nations and states. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :: -= THE FOURTH WORLD DOCUMENTATION PROJECT =- :: :: A service provided by :: :: The Center For World Indigenous Studies :: :: www.cwis.org :: ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: Originating at the Center for World Indigenous Studies, Olympia, Washington USA www.cwis.org © 1999 Center for World Indigenous Studies (All Rights Reserved. References up to 500 words must be referenced to the Center for World Indigenous Studies and/or the Author Copyright Policy Material appearing in the Fourth World Documentation Project Archive is accepted on the basis that the material is the original, unoccupied work of the author or authors. Authors agree to indemnify the Center for World Indigenous Studies, and DayKeeper Press for all damages, fines and costs associated with a finding of copyright infringement by the author or by the Center for World Indigenous Studies Fourth World Documentation Project Archive in disseminating the author(s) material. In almost all cases material appearing in the Fourth World Documentation Project Archive will attract copyright protection under the laws of the United States of America and the laws of countries which are member states of the Berne Convention, Universal Copyright Convention or have bi-lateral copyright agreements with the United States of America. Ownership of such copyright will vest by operation of law in the authors and/or The Center for World Indigenous Studies, Fourth World Journal or DayKeeper Press. The Fourth World Documentation Project Archive and its authors grant a license to those accessing the Fourth World Documentation Project Archive to render copyright materials on their computer screens and to print out a single copy for their personal non-commercial use subject to proper attribution of the Center for World Indigenous Studies Fourth World Documentation Project Archive and/or the authors. Questions may be referred to: Director of Research Center for World Indigenous Studies PMB 214 1001 Cooper Point RD SW Suite 140 Olympia, Washington 98502-1107 USA 360-754-1990 www.cwis.org usaoffice@cwis.org OCR Software provided by Caere Corporation