Fighting Terrorism Since 1492. . .

Note to Iraqis: "What ever you do, don't sign any treaties with these bastards, they're here to steal your land!"

--ryan



Tribes, Iraqis Have Sovereignty Issues in Common

By JODI RAVE Lee Enterprises
August 28, 2004

  
A popular T-shirt in Indian Country these days shows Geronimo and his band brandishing rifles, looking mean and tough. The heading over the picture reads: "Homeland Security." The slogan under the photo: "Fighting Terrorism Since 1492."

It's an obvious play on U.S. policy since Sept. 11 - policy that led, in part, to the U.S. occupation of Iraq. But a more a apt comparison could be made between Native people and Iraqis.

Both are subject to U.S. definitions of sovereignty. And if Native history can be a guide, the Iraqi people should be worried.

A few centuries of Washington-led efforts to eliminate, restore and then chip away at tribal sovereignty have reduced formerly self-governing tribes to quasi-sovereign nations. Their remaining independence is frequently trumped by state and federal interests.
Another common tie uniting Iraq and Native people? U.S. interest in their sovereignty seems to rest squarely on each nation's wealth of natural resources.

Who will ultimately control Iraqi oil?

In the United States, chiefs and warriors like Crow Flies High, Sitting Bull and Chief Joseph were among the original homeland defenders - North America teemed with vast oil and mineral reserves, topped with timber stretches and nutrient-rich soils - who refused to adopt foreign concepts of self-governance.

Yet, the United States forced them to abandon land bases and traditional power structures. In 1934, Congress passed the Indian Reorganization Act, creating cookie-cutter constitutions for tribes.
Most tribes had no choice but to accept it.

The Dine, or Navajo, were among the few tribes to successfully reject the IRA. It remains one of the most culturally grounded, politically successful and populous tribes in the country.

Now, decades later and a half a world away, the United States is ushering in a new government, and new leadership for Iraq.
The militant cleric Muqtada al-Sadr refuses to accept Iraq's foreign-made government. Instead, he set up a military stronghold within the Imam Ali Shrine, where he has led a bloody battle in defiance of U.S. attempts to set the course for sovereignty in his homeland.

Will history paint him as Iraq's "savage Indian" or its Crazy Horse? How long can al-Sadr's bows and arrows withstand ferocious bombardment from U.S. aerial assaults?

But battles can only be waged for so long.

Here in the Land of Plenty, warriors laid down their weapons and chiefs signed treaties. In exchange for millions of acres, the United States promised to uphold tribal sovereignty and provide compensation for destroyed tribal infrastructures.

Government neglect remains a hallmark of that tradition.

The U.S. War Department was the first agency charged with helping tribes recover from warfare. The baton was later handed to the Interior Department and its Bureau of Indian Affairs.

Today, Eloise Cobell and more than 500,000 Native landowners are suing the Interior Department. They demand a proper accounting of billions of dollars missing from U.S. managed-trust fund accounts. The accounts contained money that belonged to tribal citizens; they earned the money from the use of natural resources on Native land.
If Native trust funds appear to be a boondoggle for the Interior Department, a similar scheme may likely haunt the Iraqi Trust Fund, created to pool billions of dollars needed to rebuild what war has destroyed.

The L.A. Times recently reported 27 criminal investigations of the U.S.-led agency overseeing the rebuilding of Iraq. It reports "evidence of millions of dollars' worth of fraud, waste, and abuse," according to the Coalitions Provisional Authorities inspector general.

If foreign-policy makers believe it's possible for a country to parachute into another nation, impose its military might, kill innocent civilians, install a new government then choose and replace its leaders - and still guarantee sovereignty - they might only look at U.S-Indian relations.

It's a lesson yet to be learned.

It's been 130 years since the last major Indian War was fought in this country. And 70 years since passage of the IRA.

In that time, U.S. leaders have made scant progress in rebuilding tribal infrastructures. And sovereignty is but a problematic curiosity.

Jodi Rave covers Native issues for Lee Enterprises. She can be reached at (406) 523-5299 or jodi.rave@missoulian.com