American Indian Movement
Statement of
THE AMERICAN INDIAN MOVEMENT
International Confederation of Autonomous Chapters
GENEVA, SWITZERLAND
24 OCTOBER 1996
ON THE OCCASION OF THE MEETING OF THE UNITED NATIONS
OPEN-ENDED, INTERSESSIONAL WORKING GROUP CONSIDERING
THE DRAFT DECLARATION ON THE RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES
Good morning. My name is Troy Lynn Star Yellow Wood, an indigenous
person of the Western Hemisphere and an Oglala LAKOTA. I am delivering
this statement on the behalf of the Autonomous Confederation of the
American Indian Movement.
The American Indian Movement is a legitimate national liberation
organization in the original indigenous territories of North America, now claimed by the United States. We have been active in the United Nations
since before there was a Working Group on Indigenous Peoples and
before there was a Draft Declaration. It is because of our long-standing
work in this forum that we feel compelled to inform you why we are leaving
this process today. We stand in complete solidarity with our Maori brothers
and sisters.
When Indigenous Peoples first arrived in the UN in 1977, the world was a
much different place. The possibilities for a genuine and respectful
expansion of fundamental human rights, especially the right for all
peoples to be free from colonial domination, seemed great. We took
seriously, as we thought the members of the United Nations did,
high-sounding principles such as the self-determination of peoples, and
ideals such as the promotion of world peace and cooperation. We came
here, with our brothers and sisters, to bring revolutionary vision and
change to the narrow and moribund United Nations system, not to
acquiesce in it, or to accept it fatalistically. We brought goodwill and the
dignity of our peoples and nations to this foreign place in attempt to
vindicate the rights of our future generations. Now, we realize that we
were mistaken to place so many of our hopes in a system that has neither
the need nor the desire to assist us in the decolonization of our peoples
and our homelands.
What has met us here in Geneva is the all too familiar atmosphere of
duplicity, deceit and disrespect that we receive from the invader states in
our homelands. In 1492, the year that our territories were first invaded by European colonialism, the Spanish scholar Nebrija stated that language is
the perfect instrument of the empire. Over the centuries, we as
Indigenous Peoples have come to realize the truth of Nebrija's
forthrightness in describing methods by which language is used in the
legal and political processes of the settler states to suppress us. We are
now shocked and dismayed that the process of considering the Draft Declaration is being captured by a similar imperial ideological perspective,
and is itself becoming a tool of continuing colonization, empire and
genocide against Indigenous Peoples.
Specifically, hollow pronouncements that the working group will proceed
on the grounds that Indigenous Peoples will be allowed full and effective participation along with state governments, have meant that Indigenous Peoples are allowed to comment on the Draft, but that states alone will
retain the sole right to determine the ultimate complexion and content of
the Draft that will impact us. Such an arrangement cannot honestly be construed as the genuine partnership with Indigenous Peoples that the
United Nations has claimed to desire.
When asked to respond to the three reasonable requests of the indigenous caucus, namely: That the Draft Declaration be accepted at this session of
the Working Group without negotiation, changes, amendments or
deletions; That the proposed agenda be altered to provide an opportunity
for substantive debate on the most critical aspects of the Draft, such as the
right of Indigenous Peoples to exercise self-determination, indigenous territorial rights, treaty rights, and other collective rights. Articles of the
Draft should not be re-grouped or otherwise subject to suggestion for alteration or revision; That the rules of procedure for the Working Group
be suspended to allow for genuine, full, effective and co-equal participation
of both states and Indigenous Peoples. Participation is meaningless without the consensus of the Working Group also including the decision-making contribution of Indigenous Peoples and nations on an equal level with states.
In reaction to the indigenous caucus request, only six states availed themselves of the opportunity to respond, and they in relatively mild or couched language. It was only our indigenous relatives from Fiji who had
the good will to address and support our reasonable requests fully. Other states made high-sounding statements about how indigenous 'input (as opposed to genuine participation) will be indispensable,' or that indigenous participation is 'absolutely fundamental', to the discussion of the Draft. Yet, when almost all Indigenous Peoples withdrew from the session in frustration, the states proceeded with regrouping and suggested text changes in the
Draft. So much for the indispensable and fundamental need for indigenous participation. On the the third point, absolutely no states responded to the
need to adopt structural changes that would provide for co-equal
indigenous participation in the operation of the Working Group.
It is clear that the Draft is already an expression of compromised aspirations
of Indigenous Peoples. Virtually all Indigenous Peoples acknowledge that
the Draft is an imperfect document that the open-ended Working Group, indigenous delegates made it clear that no changes that would serve to weaken the document would be acceptable. Despite this clear indigenous position, states have taken great liberty in suggesting changes and
alterations to the Draft, designed to destroy most of the positive content
of an admittedly imperfect document. Several states have made it clear that
the Draft, after twelve years of debate in which every state in this Working Group had the opportunity to participate , will not be passed in its current
form. To ask Indigenous Peoples after twelve years of work on the Draft,
as the Chairman of the Working Group asked, to expect current
discussions to continue for an additional seven to ten years, is both unnecessary and intolerable. Indigenous Peoples are confronted on a
daily basis with matters of life and death, of invasion, theft and survival.
To expect us to devote critical time, resources and energy to a process that does not genuinely respect or welcome our legitimate, co-equal, decision-making participation, is unreasonable. To expect us to devote another
several years to an unequal and confining process that may, in the end,
harm us more than assist us, is unacceptable.
It is also clear that powerful states, such as the United States, will not allow
a genuine expression of self-determination, collective rights, or territorial
rights to be embodied in the Draft. It is apparent that such state positions,
and these United Nations processes which legitimize them, are clearly intended to effect the further 'domestication' of all Indigenous Peoples. We
will not consent to be a part of such oppressive processes.
We will not allow our presence or our participation in this forum which is organized in a manner that is contrary and hostile to our understanding of respect and participation, to be construed as lending either tacit or active consent to this process. We leave this statement as an expression of active opposition to any and all processes that seek to address matters of fundamental concern to us, but that marginalize our authority to affect the ultimate articulation of our rights and our interests. This statement, however should not be judged as a mere complaint or naysaying. In the continuing
spirit of mutual respect, and in the hope that we might again sit in dialogue
with each other, either in your territories or ours, to discuss our mutual concerns, we provide the following recommendations:
That the Draft Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, after twelve years of consideration, discussion and debate in the Working Group on Indigenous Peoples, with extensive participation of indigenous delegates, and with full opportunity of states to contribute to the discussion, should be adopted at this session of the Working Group as the minimum international standard of the rights of Indigenous Peoples and nations. If states are unwilling to accept this reasonable, albeit flawed, version of the Draft, then we, as Indigenous Peoples and nations should assert our right to strengthen the articles that have already been diluted, and/or to meet independently of the United Nations to revive our own Declaration to stand as an alternative to the ultimate state version that will almost inevitably result from the current process.
That any and all future sessions of the United Nations bodies concerned with the Draft Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples have the conventional rules of procedure suspended so as to allow the full, effective and co-equal, decision-making (including consensus making and /or voting) participation of Indigenous Peoples/nations and member states concerned.
That indigenous nations and peoples, including and especially traditional representation, and not simply those tribal or indigenous governments whose legitimacy is defined or recognized by states, be seated within and among states, on the basis of co-equality and in the spirit of the partnership described in the proclamation of the UN Decade of Indigenous Peoples.
That sessions of future meetings discussing the Draft Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples convene in United Nations regional centers, such as in Bangkok, Thailand or Santiago, Chile, to afford Indigenous Peoples a greater opportunity to participate in the deliberations on a more affordable, and a more participatory basis.
In conclusion, we have to realize that the processes in this body have
become too arbitrary, oppressive and disrespectful of our status as
indigenous nations and peoples to continue our participation. Some
states will delight in our departure, but we have put them on notice that
they have not seen the last of us. We will continue to advance the battle
for Indigenous Peoples' rights wherever we are, and we will continue to
support, in every spiritual and physical way available to us, our indigenous brothers and sisters who remain here, and where ever they may struggle. Despite all attempts by our enemies to divide us, we as the original peoples
of the earth remain steadfast and strong. Perhaps, when we believe that a sufficient level of mutual respect and cooperation has developed in these
halls, we may even return here to the United Nations. In the meanwhile,
we will return to our homelands to assert our rights where the terrain is a
bit more familiar and where the battleground is a little more level.
AMERICAN INDIAN MOVEMENT INTERNATIONAL CONFEDERATION OF AUTONOMOUS CHAPTERS
P.O. Box 481593 Denver, Co. 80248-1593 USA
Founded in 1968, AIM has played a significant role in
Native American activism. Includes a profile and a brief
history of the organization..
|
|
Means, Russell - Profile of Russell Means
Learn about this American Indian Movement leader's life
history. Read his perspective of the 1973 Siege of
Wounded Knee and get AIM information.
|
MSN Encarta - American Indian Movement
Research the history and objectives of this Native
American activist organization.
|
American Indian Movement
Comprehensive resource describes the formation of
this group, posts a chronological history of the movement
and list upcoming events.
|
American Indian Movement
AIM rose to prominence during the Wounded Knee
occupation, and continues to advocate
Native-American rights.
Find chapters, events and contacts.
|
American Indian Movement - Russell Means
Tribute to this organization's co-founder includes a
history of the group, a timeline of its activities and
contact details.
|
SISIS - American Indian Movement
Aboriginal sovereignty group posts an article, originally
printed in Indian Nation, describing this political
organization's history.
American Indian Movement
|
~jamarcus/aima.html"
University of Michigan offers a history of this political
movement. Includes links to related resources.
|
A I M Support Group of New Jersey
East Coast chapter of AIM opens its homepage with
a quote from Birgil Kills Straight of the
Oglala Lakota Nation. Includes related news updates.
|
A I M Southern California Chapter
Take a look at this group's calls to political action,
find news of relevance to the movement and explore
related links.
|
A I M Eastern Dakota Chapter
Scan an article about team mascots and racism,
peruse warnings against non-Native pow wows
and follow links to related resources.
|
A I M Arizona Chapter
Southwestern branch of this political group posts a profile
of the Lakota Student Alliance, a pledge of autonomy
and links to related resources.
|
A I M Massachusetts Support Group
New England chapter provides the text of its charter,
posts a newsletter, issues calls to action and
hosts links to related material.
|
A I M of Tennessee
Find a profile of various prison-rights issues, access a
list of action alerts and peruse related news updates.
|
A I M Middle Tennessee Support Group
Chapter declares war on individuals who desecrate
Native American burial sites.
|
A I M of Florida
Includes the political group's mission statement,
a history of the organization and membership details.
|
A I M - Northern California-Great Basin Region
Provides news from this chapter of AIM led by Russell
Redner, who survived the battle of Wounded Knee in 1973.
|
MSN Communities - A I M Friends
Provides a message board and a chat room for
discussion of the movement. Gallery provides a place to
share images and photographs.
|
First Nations/First Peoples Issues
Political site presenting issues and personal experiences,
histories, American Indian Movement and Bureau of Indian
Affairs info, and campaigns.
|
Aquash, Anna Mae - First Nations Warrior
Supplies details about the mysterious murder of American
Indian movement activist Ann Mae Aquash in 1976.
|
Recollections of a Riot
Debra Bruning recounts the events leading up the 1973
conflict between the Bureau of Indian Affairs and
American Indian Movement members.
|
Wounded Knee, 1973, Collection
University of South Dakota spotlights its collection of
materials related to the conflict between American Indian
Movement members and the BIA.
|
American Indian Activism from Alcatraz to Wounded Knee
Read about Robert Warrior's book "Like a Hurricane,"
which details the development and actions of the
American Indian Movement.
|
American Indian Activism
Read about a comprehensive guide to American Indian
Movement actions and history. With a book-cover
scan and link to an order form.
|
A I M Central Indiana Support Group
Peruse a list of objectives espoused by this regional
AIM chapter, find a tribute to Leonard Peltier
and follow links to related resources.
|
American Indian Movement of Virginia
Official website for AIM Virginia Chapter
|
American Indian Movement Texas Chapter
American Indian Movement Texas Chapter
|
American Indian Movement of Florida
Includes the political group's mission statement,
a history of the organization and membership details.
|
Background by: Silverhawk Graphics
ndn-aim | American Indian Movement 2 | Rosebud Indian Reservation
|Rosebud page 2 | Rosebud page 3 | Easter on Rosebud |