[rad-green] A pipeline offers a stark reminder of Canad a’s ongoing colonialism -- Washington Post

*https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/02/13/pipeline-offers-stark-reminder-canadas-ongoing-colonialism/
<https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/02/13/pipeline-offers-stark-reminder-canadas-ongoing-colonialism/>Washington
Post                  Feb. 13, 2020*

*A pipeline offers a stark reminder of Canada’s ongoing colonialism*

[image: Protesters blocked a road in Vancouver on Monday in solidarity with
Wet'suwet'en hereditary chiefs opposed to the construction of a natural gas
pipeline. (Darryl Dyck/The Canadian Press via AP)]
*Protesters blocked a road in Vancouver on Monday in solidarity with
Wet'suwet'en hereditary chiefs opposed to the construction of a natural gas
pipeline. (Darryl Dyck/The Canadian Press via AP)*

By Alicia Elliott

*Alicia Elliott*
<https://twitter.com/WordsandGuitar?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor>*
is
a Tuscarora writer from Six Nations of the Grand River and author of “**A
Mind Spread Out On The Ground*
<https://www.penguinrandomhouse.ca/books/588523/a-mind-spread-out-on-the-ground-by-alicia-elliott/9780385692380>
*.”*

On Monday, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police raided a Unist’ot’en camp
erected to protect indigenous land
<https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-51452217> in British Columbia,
arresting several people as police enforced an injunction against the
Wet’suwet’en hereditary chiefs, the Wet’suwet’en people and their allies.
The moment completely encapsulated the current relationship between Canada
and indigenous people. As Coastal GasLink employees cleared the camp to
make way for a natural gas pipeline, they sawed in half a wooden gate with
one word painted on it: “reconciliation
<https://twitter.com/UnistotenCamp/status/1226944443153956864?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1226944443153956864&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.bbc.com%2Fnews%2Fworld-us-canada-51452217>
.”

That word has been used by the Canadian government to describe their
supposed desire to make things right with the indigenous people after
centuries of ongoing genocide
<https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/06/11/canada-grapples-with-charge-genocide-indigenous-people-theres-no-debate?tid=lk_inline_manual_4&itid=lk_inline_manual_4>.
But “reconciliation” is not an official policy but rather a political
buzzword repurposed to signal moral progress on indigenous issues.

However, right now it is very hard to argue that Canada’s treatment of
indigenous people actually has progressed.

Canada has a long history of disregarding indigenous rights to push forward
corporate economic interests. In fact, one could say that’s a condensed
version of the entire history of Canada. The founding and expansion of
Canada is deeply indebted to the Hudson’s Bay Company, a fur-trading
business that ultimately helped colonize much of western Canada. This
connection runs so deep that Sir James Douglas
<https://www.douglascollege.ca/about-douglas/sir-james-douglas>, the
“Father of British Columbia,” was both head of the Hudson’s Bay Company and
governor of Vancouver Island for several years, before stepping down from
his HBC post to become governor of British Columbia. King Charles II even
“granted” the Hudson’s Bay Company roughly a third of Canada’s land mass,
<https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/ruperts-land> all
without consulting or making treaties with any of the indigenous people who
had cared for that land for centuries. Such is the arrogance of colonialism.

That same arrogance is what led to this moment.

Almost the entire province of British Columbia is unceded territory, which
means that there was never any legal extinguishment of indigenous title on
those lands. This position was reinforced with the landmark 1997 Supreme
Court ruling
<https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/delgamuukw-vs-british-columbia-20-years-rights-titles-1.4440703>
 *Delgamuukw v. British Columbia*, which found section 35 of the Canadian
Constitution protected indigenous title claims.

The *Delgamuukw* decision also determined that provinces could not
extinguish indigenous title. At the time, British Columbia was trying to
argue that the Wet’suwet’en and Gitxsan nations’ titles to their respective
lands had extinguished the moment British Columbia became a province.

The Canadian government has had more than 20 years since this decision to
try to find a way to legally justify controlling Wet’suwet’en land, which
they still have no title for. Since the Indian Act
<https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/indian-act> prevented
indigenous people from hiring lawyers without government permission from
1927 to 1951, the Canadian government had an additional 24 years to make
their land theft legitimate within their own legal framework. They could
have done this any time within the past 153 years Canada has existed.

But they didn’t.

Then there’s the tricky issue of what “consent” actually means. For nearly
10 years, the conservative government of Stephen Harper refused to sign on
to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People
(UNDRIP) because it took issue with the requirement that indigenous nations
have “free, prior and informed consent” (FPIC) when it comes to any laws or
land developments that impact them.

That changed when Justin Trudeau was elected in 2015. He campaigned on the
promise that when indigenous nations said no to development, it would
“absolutely” mean no.
<https://aptnnews.ca/2016/02/05/trudeau-sending-first-nations-mixed-signals-on-veto-rights-on-pipelines-chief/>
 By May 2016
<https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/canada-drops-objector-status-on-un-indigenous-rights-declaration/article29946223/>,
it seemed like Trudeau would make good on this promise, as Canada
officially removed its objector status to UNDRIP.

But when Trudeau approved the Trans Mountain pipeline that same year, he
changed course, saying indigenous nations “don’t have a veto”
<https://business.financialpost.com/news/trudeau-says-first-nations-dont-have-a-veto-over-energy-projects>
over
proposed projects in their territories. Come the 2019 election cycle, after
his government purchased the Trans Mountain pipeline project
<https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/canadian-government-to-buy-troubled-trans-mountain-pipeline/2018/05/29/f3a485ae-6359-11e8-81ca-bb14593acaa6_story.html?tid=lk_inline_manual_19&itid=lk_inline_manual_19>
  without consulting either Canadians or indigenous nations, Trudeau
returned to his previous promise, saying he would fully implement
<https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/trudeau-promises-to-legislate-implementation-of-undrip-if-re-elected-1.4473659>
UNDRIP
into Canadian law if reelected.

Since then, the Trudeau government has not elaborated on what “free, prior
and informed consent” might mean in a Canadian legal context, nor have
officials clarified how Canada can claim to have consent at all when there
is no way for indigenous nations to legally say no.

Further, though Coastal GasLink has received consent from Wet’suwet’en band
councils to build the pipeline, the Wet’suwet’en hereditary chiefs from all
five clans have insisted title lies with them, not the band councils
<https://thenarwhal.ca/they-are-erasing-our-history-indigenous-sites-buried-under-coastal-gaslink-pipeline-infrastructure/>,
and they are the only ones who can give consent. This indigenous governance
issue, too, is a legacy of the Canadian government’s policies. Canada’s
Indian Act forced band councils onto indigenous territories, displacing
traditional governance and creating political turmoil within communities.

But though many nations no longer have traditional leadership as a result
of this political interference, the Wet’suwet’en do. So which is the real
Wet’suwet’en government: the traditional one people have held onto despite
colonial interference or the one that’s paid by — and accountable to — the
Canadian government?

Canada’s perpetual prioritizing of corporate interests above all else —
even its own laws — got us into this mess. To get out of it will require
actually working with indigenous nations as equals, which means allowing
our nations the right to say no.

If reconciliation isn’t just an empty word; if the Canadian government
really does value its relationship with indigenous people; if the rule of
law does apply to everyone, including Canadian politicians, multinational
corporations and police, perhaps it’s time for Canada to prove it.

-- 

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sid-l" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sid-l/CACKppcxGpg4SpKxV8TZrs3g__y01rK%2BhpqYQEuBN1c7Tk7qhpw%40mail.gmail.com.

---
To unsubscribe: <mailto:[email protected]>
List help: <https://riseup.net/lists>