Lakota Indian Nation Plans To Breakaway From North America
Moves For A New 'United State' Inside The US
Russia's President Putin To Lead International UN Moves To Legitimise Lakota Sovereignty?
By
Darryl Mason
This story could fizzle out in the coming days, or it could become one of the biggest of 2008. Gut instinct tells me this is not going away anytime soon, particularly if the
Lakota get international backing for their
drive to form a new nation inside the United States, which they may well do, from Russia's President Putin (see bottom third of this post for more) :
The Lakota Indians, who gave the world legendary warriors Sitting Bull and Crazy Horse, have withdrawn from treaties with the United States, leaders said Wednesday."We are no longer citizens of the United States of America and all those who live in the five-state area that encompasses our country are free to join us."
Lakota country includes parts of the states of Nebraska, South Dakota, North Dakota, Montana and Wyoming.
The new country would issue its own passports and driving licences, and living there would be tax-free -- provided residents renounce their US citizenship, Means said.
A delegation of Lakota leaders delivered a message to the State Department on Monday, announcing they were unilaterally withdrawing from treaties they signed with the federal government of the United States, some of them more than 150 years old.
They also visited the Bolivian, Chilean, South African and Venezuelan embassies, and will continue on their diplomatic mission and take it overseas in the coming weeks and months, they told the news conference.
Some news reports are claiming that Bolivia's indigenous president
Evo Morales has said he is "very, very interested" in the
Lakota move for sovereign nation status. We may also see the indigenous leaders of countries like Venezuela, and other South American countries, supporting the
Lakota.
The Lakota representatives are claiming that treaties signed with the United States more than 150 years ago are "worthless words on worthless paper."
The treaties have been "repeatedly violated in order to steal our culture, our land and our ability to maintain our way of life," the reborn freedom movement says.
Withdrawing from the treaties was entirely legal..
"This is according to the laws of the United States, specifically article six of the constitution," which states that treaties are the supreme law of the land, he said.
"It is also within the laws on treaties passed at the Vienna Convention and put into effect by the US and the rest of the international community in 1980. We are legally within our rights to be free and independent..."
In September, 2007, presumably guessing at what was coming, the United States opposed the adoption by the United Nations of a non-binding declaration on the rights of indigenous peoples.
"We have 33 treaties with the United States that they have not lived by. They continue to take our land, our water, our children," Phyllis Young, who helped organize the first international conference on indigenous rights in Geneva in 1977, told the news conference.
story continues after...
-------------------------More Blogs By Darryl MasonGo Here For The Latest Stories From 'Your New Reality'
Go Here For The Latest Stories From 'The Orstrahyun'Go Here To Read The Latest Chapter From Darryl Mason's Online Novel About Life After The Bird Flu Pandemic
--------------------------
story continues...Lakota Indians Have Refused Government Payoff For 130 YearsDespite living in abject poverty,
the Lakota have consistently refused to allow the United States government to buy their nation's land, for more than 130 years. The original purchase offer has sat in a bank and swollen to more than $570 million. But they refuse to sell. How can they sell up, they say, the "sky and air is not for sale", their land is sacred.
Regardless of need, opposition to taking the money consistently runs more than 90 percent in newspaper surveys, said Tim Giago, publisher of the Lakota Journal.
Talk of the cash reminds the Sioux of the gold-seeking explorers who swarmed into the land seven years after President Andrew Johnson signed the Black Hills treaty.
The resulting military battles culminated in Custer's defeat at Little Big Horn in 1876.
Congress responded by telling the Sioux: Give up the Black Hills, or lose federal food, medicine and blankets, rations pledged earlier to compensate for disrupting their hunting lands with westward expansion. Only 10 percent of the adult male Sioux population signed the treaty giving up the land, but Congress enacted it into law in 1877.
A federal judge, later echoed by the Supreme Court, blasted the government's deal, saying: "A more ripe and rank case of dishonorable dealing will never, in all probability, be found in our history."
The original 1868 treaty still exists, and is treasured by Sioux Indian elders. It promises the land will be "for the absolute and undisturbed use and occupancy of the Sioux."
This is the key treaty the
Lakota say has been broken.
A
reader of the Rapid City Journal supplies some fascinating background to this story :
The Lakota (Brother) Peoples were a confederacy of twelve tribes who inhabited the high plains from Western Wisconsin to Eastern Montana, and from South Dakota north into Saskatchewan and Manitoba. The Lakota spoke a Siouxan language and, along with many other tribes who were not Lakota, they were referred to by the French Canadian fur trappers who were the first Europeans to meet them, as the “Sioux.”
In 1869 several of the Lakota tribes met with the United States representatives to negotiate a treaty at Fort Laramie, which the U.S promptly began violating. The treaty set up what was called “The Great Sioux Reservation,” which, at that time, included most of North and South Dakota and part of eastern Montana. Other Lakota tribes living farther east, who were collectively called the “Dakota,” had already signed treaties on their own with the U.S. several years before.
In that treaty the U.S. agreed to respect the territorial soverginty of the western Sioux Nations. But when the government needed to put the Northern Pacific Railroad through the Great Sioux Reservation... the government needed to take back a big hunk of the reservation.
A plot was worked out that involved General Philip Sheridan and Colonel George Custer, and several other leading officials in the Territory to fake a gold discovery in the Black Hills, which were the most sacred lands on earth to the Lakota, the sacred Paha Sapa, the center of the world.
A supposedly innocent survey party arranged the gold discovery using a few lumps of quartz, a hand-full of placer gold dust from Montana, and a shot gun, and when they returned to civilization with the evidence they deliberately let everyone know about it in the newspapers, thus starting a massive gold rush.
The Lakota, of course, defended their lands against the invading gold hunters, and the U.S. Army, of course, was called in to protect the gold seakers, not the Indians.
This started the war that culminated in the Little Bighorn massacre, and the flight of about half of the Sioux peoples into Canada that winter. The United States then terminated the Great Sioux Reservation and replaced it with a double hand-full of very small reservations scattered across the territory on some of the worst land the government could find.
Russian President Putin To Lead International Support For Lakota Sovereignty?And here's one of the strangest parts of this remarkable story, at least from my end. I've had twelve e-mails today from regular Russian readers of this blog who claim that there is a strong rumour (that is, an official government 'leak') doing the rounds over there that Vladimir Putin is planning to give his official support to the Indian nation, and in 2008 will announce support for future trade deals with the
Lakota nation.
Why would Putin do this?
According to e-mailers, because he is furious at the the US support for
Kosovo's declaration of independence. There's
some background here on why this angers Putin so, but basically boils down to Putin viewing the United States' involvement in
Kosovo's drive for independence as being a way of causing chaos and weakening stability along Russia's borders in Eastern Europe.
Supporting the
Lakota's push for independence, and rounding up support in the UN Security Council, could be Putin's way of striking back at
BushCo. for its
Kosovo dealings.
Now, I have no idea if any of this Russia Will Back
Lakatos thing is true, but it will certainly shake things up on an international scale in 2008 if Putin does indeed do these things.
But how would this move for independence by the
Lakota play out in terms of United States'
sovereignty? That is already being threatened by the creeping introduction of the so-called North American Union.
But the
Lakota are not alone. There are also movements within the states of California and Vermont to officially breakaway from the rest of the United States.
If the
Lakota are able to keep up momentum, and force the international media to take notice, and if they won the support of Russia, as odd as that may now sound, they may find the United Nations willing to back them in their drive for independence. Though you would expect such a reality to take many years, if not many decades, to come to fruition.
There is at least one major point in their favour. The paperwork of the original treaties still exist, and can be challenged in federal and international courts.
A New Country Is Being Born - Lakota Nation Declares Independence From The United StatesLakota Have Refused To Take US Government Payment For Their Sacred Lands Since The 1870s