In the autumn of 1875, a pivotal moment unfolded in the history of the North American continent. The United States government, driven by its ambition for westward expansion, issued a stringent ultimatum to the Lakota people, a nation steadfastly resisting the encroachment upon their ancestral lands. This decree demanded that the Lakota abandon their territory within a matter of weeks and relocate to a reservation designated by the American government. Failure to comply would result in their classification as "hostiles," subjecting them to forceful removal.
The Lakota, deeply rooted in their land and fiercely protective of their sovereignty, refused to acquiesce to this ultimatum. This act of defiance ignited a war, a conflict etched in the annals of American history. One of its most infamous episodes was the Battle of the Little Bighorn on June 25, 1876. Lieutenant Colonel George Armstrong Custer, leading the 7th Cavalry, launched an attack on a large encampment of Lakota, Northern Cheyenne, and Arapaho warriors. Custer and his entire command met a resounding defeat, a stunning victory for the Native American forces defending their way of life.
Fast forward to March 18, 2003, a similar scenario played out on the international stage. President George W. Bush issued a 48-hour ultimatum to Iraqi President Saddam Hussein and his sons, demanding their exile under threat of "military conflict." The world watched as American troops, echoing the historical advance of the 7th Cavalry, commenced an assault and invasion of Iraq, a nation situated on its own land and governed by its own terms.
The parallels between these historical events are striking. The ultimatum, the military incursion, the assertion of dominance – these elements resonate across time and cultures. For those seeking to understand the underlying motivations and mindset driving the war in Iraq, the Statement of the Tetuwan Oyate, Teton Sioux Nation Treaty Council suggests a simple, yet profound, solution: "Ask an Indian." The historical experiences of Native American nations with the United States government offer a crucial lens through which to analyze contemporary American foreign policy.
The American Colonial Process: A Continuing Narrative
The invasion and subsequent occupation of Iraq represent, according to the Statement of the Tetuwan Oyate, Teton Sioux Nation Treaty Council, the latest manifestation of a long-standing American colonial process. This process, often cloaked in the rhetoric of "democracy" and "human rights," as interpreted through an American lens, frequently serves to advance American interests, be they access to land, natural resources, precious metals, or, in this case, oil.
The Lakota Nation’s own history serves as a stark example of this dynamic. Approximately 153 years prior to the Iraq invasion, the discovery of gold in the Black Hills triggered American interest in "liberating" Lakota territory. The subsequent occupation of Lakota land by foreign forces commenced shortly after this discovery. This occupation, deemed by the Statement of the Tetuwan Oyate, Teton Sioux Nation Treaty Council as a violation of international treaties and conventions, has persisted to this day. The Lakota’s ongoing struggle to expel these "infidels" mirrors, in their view, the plight of the Iraqi people.
The Tetuwan Oyate, Teton Sioux Nation Treaty Council, was established in 1894, a mere four years after the Wounded Knee Massacre. This tragic event, which saw the 7th Cavalry inflict retribution for their defeat at Little Bighorn by massacring a peaceful encampment of primarily elderly, sick, women, and children in the snow-covered lands of present-day South Dakota, underscores the brutal realities of the American colonial experience.
The Treaty Council was founded with a clear purpose: to uphold the provisions of peace treaties lawfully established with the United States. These treaties guaranteed Lakota sovereignty over their land, resources, and culture. However, for over a century, the United States has, according to the Statement of the Tetuwan Oyate, Teton Sioux Nation Treaty Council, employed its vast power to undermine Lakota rights and maintain the Lakota people in a state of servitude.
A Battle Waged on Multiple Fronts
The Lakota Nation’s struggle for self-determination has been waged on multiple fronts. Their elders and leaders have tirelessly pursued justice, taking their battle from the Supreme Court of the United States to the institutions of the United Nations. Their aim is to preserve their right to their territory, their sovereignty as a nation, and their self-determination over their own future. The Lakota Nation emphasizes that their defense of sovereignty extends to all peoples, not just the sovereign.
The Statement of the Tetuwan Oyate, Teton Sioux Nation Treaty Council highlights the resonance of historical experiences with the unfolding events in Iraq. Watching media reports of American troops opening fire on vehicles filled with families fleeing the horrors of the invasion, the Lakota people experienced a visceral connection to their own history, recalling the massacres that occurred within their own country.
Tony Black Feather, Spokesman for the Teton Sioux Nation Treaty Council and the United Nations delegate of the traditional Lakota Nation, articulated this sentiment with stark clarity: "This is the same history. We are watching history repeat itself again and again. This is not a war. It is a mass murder for oil and resources – the same thing they did to us – the same people are in Iraq that killed my Lakota people and stole our Lakota land."
Black Feather emphasized the Lakota Nation’s neutrality in the conflict, citing their treaties with the United States that establish their separate national status. He expressed sadness that the United States was utilizing resources stolen from Lakota territories to wage war on innocent people, stating that the Lakota Nation could not condone the use of their resources to support the invasion of Iraq. The Lakota people, he asserted, sympathize with the people of Iraq, believing that the United States is attempting to subject them to the same reservation and trust system that has been used against the Lakota people.
The "Indian Agent" Analogy: A Colonial Blueprint?
The Statement of the Tetuwan Oyate, Teton Sioux Nation Treaty Council draws a compelling analogy between the American post-war plans for Iraq and the historical administration of Native American reservations. The BBC reported on April 3, 2003, that British Foreign Minister for the Middle East, Mike O’Brien, stated that the American post-war plans included the appointment of 23 American "ministers" who would be stationed in Baghdad. The Statement of the Tetuwan Oyate, Teton Sioux Nation Treaty Council suggests that these "ministers" bear a striking resemblance to the "Indian agents" who were historically installed on reservations throughout the United States. These agents, ostensibly representatives of the American government, often prioritized the interests of the United States over the well-being and self-determination of the Native American tribes they were assigned to oversee.
Despite denials from American officials, the facts, according to the Statement of the Tetuwan Oyate, Teton Sioux Nation Treaty Council, seem to contradict assertions that the United States has no intention of colonizing Iraq. The document points to the American government’s extensive efforts to create the illusion that Native American territory was never colonized, despite numerous violations of treaties. Terms such as "plenary power," "sovereignty," "nation-to-nation," "citizenship," and "Indian reorganization" are cited as examples of America’s manipulation of the language of colonization.
Propaganda and Shifting Justifications
The Statement of the Tetuwan Oyate, Teton Sioux Nation Treaty Council argues that the same propaganda efforts that were employed in the colonization of Native American territories are now being deployed with respect to Iraq. Initially, the stated objectives of the invasion were to topple Saddam Hussein and to locate and destroy Iraq’s alleged weapons of mass destruction. However, the document notes a shift in rhetoric, with President Bush and his administration increasingly emphasizing the goal of "freeing the Iraqi people."
The Statement of the Tetuwan Oyate, Teton Sioux Nation Treaty Council suggests that this re-ordering of priorities and the increasingly strident language are a response to the realities on the ground in Iraq. The failure to find weapons of mass destruction has undermined the initial justification for the war, forcing the administration to shift its focus to the liberation of the Iraqi people. However, the document also suggests that this shift may be indicative of a hidden agenda in the Middle East.
According to the Lakota leadership, the American agenda is not so hidden. They believe that the real target of the war is to establish US supremacy in a strategically important, oil-rich region and to protect Israel’s regional superiority and its monopoly over weapons of mass destruction in the Middle East. This perspective aligns with that of numerous analysts both within the United States and abroad.
International Opposition and the Role of the United Nations
The Statement of the Tetuwan Oyate, Teton Sioux Nation Treaty Council highlights the growing international opposition to the war in Iraq. Official movement within the United Nations against the war was growing, with Secretary-General Kofi Annan expressing widespread unhappiness about the situation and Arab nations pushing for a UN resolution calling for a cease-fire. The Organization of the Islamic Conference Group, representing 57 member nations, also supported taking the issue to the General Assembly.
The Lakota Nation, drawing upon their own historical experience with American occupation, expresses support for these efforts to oppose the American invasion and colonization. They particularly emphasize the importance of applying international law to this international situation, viewing it as essential for achieving a civilized and peaceful world.
The document also criticizes the United States for attempting to suppress opposition to its agenda by pressuring countries to vote against or abstain from supporting a General Assembly meeting to discuss the war. The United States even threatened that invoking the Uniting for Peace resolution would be "harmful to the UN." This thinly veiled threat, according to Greenpeace campaigner Mike Townsley, was a blatant attempt to undermine the rights of UN member states.
The Right to Self-Determination: A Universal Principle
The Statement of the Tetuwan Oyate, Teton Sioux Nation Treaty Council underscores the Lakota Nation’s long-standing advocacy, alongside other Indigenous peoples, for the passage of the Declaration on the Rights of the World’s Indigenous Peoples within the United Nations system. This declaration, which affirms the rights of Indigenous peoples to self-determination and control over their resources, faces opposition from powerful states, including the United States.
The Statement of the Tetuwan Oyate, Teton Sioux Nation Treaty Council concludes by emphasizing the need for the world family of nations to strengthen the United Nations as a venue for peaceful dialogue. They reaffirm their commitment to peace and justice and express their support for the efforts of UN member states to condemn the invasion of Iraq, call for a cease-fire, and demand the withdrawal of US and British armed forces. They emphasize that human rights, sovereignty, and self-determination are fundamental principles of both Lakota Natural Law and the United Nations Charter.
The Lakota Nation, drawing upon their own experiences with colonization and the denial of their right to self-determination, offers a powerful lesson to the world. Their history serves as a cautionary tale about the dangers of one nation imposing its values and interests upon others. The Statement of the Tetuwan Oyate, Teton Sioux Nation Treaty Council concludes with a prayer for true peace and justice for all peoples and nations who have experienced the weight of American imperialism. It underscores the importance of standing united against tyranny and upholding the right to self-determination for all.