Committee: UNHCR

Topic: Definition of Sovereignty in Tribal Nations

Chairs: Anna Alvis Molly Bronner

I. Theme of Conference

As part of the academy for classical studies, the question of ethics and humanities

is a large topic fit for constant exploration. Within this conference, the topic of ethics will

be explored further, and ​how different cultures of different areas affects the places views

of humanity and ethics.

II. Rationale

Advancements in sea technology and the discovery of far away riches became a

catalyst for colonization in the 1500s (Magdoff, year?). Asia became a prime trading spot

for Europe, minerals of Africa became spread across the world, and the rich soil of the

Americas became full with European crops. However, none of this was ‘discovered.’ For

centuries before ships sailed to these lands, untouched populations lived freely.

Nowadays colonizer and colonized have mixed, or conquered, and many of the original,

or native/indigenous depending on the origin, find themselves fighting for the same land

their ancestors believed they had rights too. The United States of America has many

tribes who are in this situation, but how it is being solved is questionable. This

conference is being held in order to facilitate a solid definition of sovereign, and to

guarantee protections for the future of native populations

III. Background of the topic

 The age of colonization started around 1500, following the European discoveries

of a sea route around Africa’s southern coast in 1488 and of America in 1592 (Nowell,

Madoff, Webster). Following the conquest and settlement of new lands, Portugal, Spain,

the Dutch Republic, France, and England grew in power exponentially (ibid). In Haiti,

Latin America, and North America, natives were being enslaved to work on plantations

such as sugar cane, tobacco, or other cash crops. These slaves worked long hours for no

pay and were treated as sub-human by the plantation owners. By the early 19th century,

all of the colonies had revolted against their overseas owners and gained independence.

And soon after, slavery was abolished worldwide. However, the native population had

already been hurt beyond repair. An estimated 10 million plus Native Americans lived in

the United States when European explorers first arrived in the 15th century. By 1900, an

estimated less than 300,000 Native Americans lived in the United States (“Atrocities

Against”).

IV. Contemporary Evidence

In the United States, the relation between America, Native Tribes, and Treaties is a very

delicate balance. More than 370 treaties have been ratified between the USA and Native Tribes,

which define the rocky relationship native tribes must navigate (Wang). In order to make a treaty

with the government of America, both parties are considered an independent nation (hoffman,

berkeley) With so many treaties made between America and Native Nations, many are

determined sovereign, the same level of sovereignty states have (native partnership). However,

the level of Native Sovereignty differs from states in that Tribes granted Tribal sovereignty can
“control their own destinies and … operate without incursions into their legal and business

affairs by the states.” (native partnership). The government does support tribes with housing

programs, the Indian Trust Program which provides monetary support for tribes, and within

border control. However, this protection has only gone so far, with many issues being brought to

light by the media, such as pipelines running through native lands, the protection of sacred land,

and the government's involvement in protection of such things.

Native populations in other countries face many different issues. Countries such as

Bolivia, that have over half the population with indigenous ancestry, still face challenges in

preserving the native culture.

Within the 20th and 21th century the idea of sovereignty has become very complex.

Native tribes constantly have to find the balance between sovereignty and reliance, and other

countries can sympathise with this plight. Areas such as Taiwan have experienced many different

lights on the definition of sovereignty and how self governance relates to freedom.

V. Countries and Research Sources

United States:

There are 573 federally recognized tribal governments in the United States. These tribes

possess the right to form their own governments, to enforce laws (both civil and criminal)

within their lands, to tax, to establish requirements for membership, to license and

regulate activities, to zone, and to exclude persons from tribal territories. Limitations on

tribal powers of self-government include the same limitations applicable to states; for

example, neither tribes nor states have the power to make war, engage in foreign

relations, or coin money (this includes paper currency) (“Federal Register”).

Cherokee Nation:

Cherokee Nation is the federally recognized government of the Cherokee people and has

sovereign status granted by law and treaty. The Constitution of the Cherokee Nation was

approved by the commissioner of Indian Affairs on September 5, 1975. The newest

constitution was enacted in 2006. It calls for three branches of government: Executive,

Legislative, and Judicial. It also includes an Election Commission, Tax Commission, and

Marshal Service (​Visit Cherokee Nation)​ .

Chickasaw Nation:

The Chickasaw Nation’s Treaty of Hopewell, signed in 1786, formally acknowledged the

Chickasaw Nation’s national sovereignty and is still recognized today (“Tribal

Sovereignty”). The Chickasaw Nation is one of the most wealthy native nations in the

United States. Like many tribes, the Chickasaw Nation rakes in huge amounts of money

from casinos. Today, the nation has a budget of $750 million a year and the nation’s

government employs 10,500 people (Rath).

Blackfeet Tribe of the Blackfeet Indian Reservation of Montana​:

“The Blackfeet Tribe of the Blackfeet Indian Reservation in Montana, is a federally

recognized sovereign nation that exercises governmental control over its land and

resources pursuant to Section 16 of the Indian Reorganization Act of 1934 and

amendments thereof. The Blackfeet Tribe is represented by more than 17,000 enrolled

members with ancestral ties reaching as far as Canada and throughout the United States

and has been in existence for more than 10,000 years. Nearly half of the members still

reside on the Blackfeet Reservation with a land base of 1.5 million acres, known as our

homeland today,” (Blackfeet Country).

Comanche Nation, Oklahoma:

“The Treaty of Medicine Lodge was signed in 1867 in Kansas with the Comanche,

Kiowa, Apache, Cheyenne and Arapaho. The tribes were promised protection from the

hunters who were killing off the buffalo and were to be provided schools, churches and

annuities. The tribes, in turn, were to permit railroads to be built through their lands,

cease raiding and agree to live on a reservation to be set up for them. In addition, 38.5

million acres (60,000 square miles) were given up for a reservation that contained just

over three million acres (4,800 square miles). Reservation life began for the Comanches

in 1869.”

“The Comanche Nation now numbers 13,000 persons, with more than half of them

residing in this area of Southwest Oklahoma. The Comanche Nation Complex is located

nine miles north of Lawton, Oklahoma, and offers many services for tribal members. The

Comanche Nation owns land jointly with the Kiowa and Apache Tribes (known as the

K.C.A.), but also owns land on its own. Comanches are the best educated of all Indian
tribes with more students per capita enrolled in higher education. We have doctors,

lawyers, chiefs ("chief" executive officers!), teachers, principals, superintendents,

registered nurses, actors, authors, artists, craftsmen,”

[Link]

omanche%[Link]

Mashpee Wampanoag Indian Tribal Council, Inc.:

“The Mashpee Wampanoag Tribe, also known as the People of the First Light, has

inhabited present day Massachusetts and Eastern Rhode Island for more than 12,000

years. After an arduous process lasting more than three decades, the Mashpee

Wampanoag were re-acknowledged as a federally recognized tribe in 2007. In 2015, the

federal government declared 150 acres of land in Mashpee and 170 acres of land in

Taunton as the Tribe’s initial reservation, on which the Tribe can exercise its full tribal

sovereignty rights. The Mashpee tribe currently has approximately 2,600 enrolled

citizens,” (“Mashpee Wampanoag Tribe”).

Oglala Sioux Tribe:

“The Oglala Sioux Tribe is a sovereign tribal nation, controlled by its own governing

body. The executive committee is comprised by a tribal president, vice president,

secretary, treasurer, fifth member, and sergeant of arms. The president and vice president

are elected while the remaining executive positions are selected by tribal council.

Tribal council members are elected from their respective districts. Pine Ridge has nine

council districts: Pine Ridge, Oglala, Wakpamni, Porcupine, Medicine Root, Eagle Nest,

Pass Creek and La Creek. Each district elects two tribal council members except for the

Pine Ridge District which elects three.

Elections for tribal president, vice president and council are held every two years in

November. Election terms are not overlapped. All tribal members living on the

reservation who are 18 years of age or older may vote in tribal elections. Newly elected

officials are sworn in at the first tribal council meeting in December following the

election,” (“Pine Ridge”).

Mexico:

“A second key part to understanding the context of indigenous rights and

self-determination in Mexico today includes the crafting and signing of the San Andrés

Peace Accords by the Zapatista Army of National Liberation and the Mexican Federal

government in 1996 as well as their implementation. The Accords on Indigenous Rights

and Culture lay the groundwork for significant changes in the areas of indigenous rights,

political participation, and cultural autonomy. Most importantly, they recognize the
existence of political subjects called pueblos indios (indigenous

peoples/towns/communities) and give conceptual validation to the terms

"self-determination" and "autonomy" by using them in the signed accords. The accords

emphasize that the state takes responsibility for not only reinforcing the political

representation of indigenous peoples and their participation in legislatures, but also for

guaranteeing the validity of internal forms of indigenous government. They further note

that the state promises to create national legislation guaranteeing indigenous communities

the right to: 1) freely associate themselves with municipalities that are primarily

indigenous in population; 2) to form associations between communities; and 3) to

coordinate their actions as indigenous peoples,” (“Indigenous Rights”).

Inuit Nation:

“​International and Canadian law provide support for Inuit having territorial rights over

Arctic waters, ice, as well as the resources that lie above and below the ice. As

Indigenous peoples, Inuit rights to Inuit Nunaat are affirmed in the United Nations

Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (the Declaration) which provides that

Indigenous peoples have the right to the lands, territories, and resources which they have

traditionally owned, occupied or otherwise used or acquired. International and Canadian

law provide support for Inuit having territorial rights over Arctic waters, ice, as well as

the resources that lie above and below the ice. The Declaration also requires States and

international bodies to respect and protect Indigenous peoples’ right to their territories.

While it is true that the Declaration is not an international treaty binding on States, the

reality is that these rights and the corresponding obligations on States have been upheld
by international tribunals, including the Inter-American human rights system. Many of

the rights have the status of binding customary law. Further, Canadian law provides

constitutional protection to Indigenous peoples’ rights to their territories through section

35 of the Constitution Act, 1982. In Canada, the same principles that apply to finding

Aboriginal title to land could equally apply to establishing Aboriginal title to ocean or sea

areas. Since 1973, the Supreme Court of Canada has confirmed that Aboriginal peoples

hold Aboriginal title to their lands, based on their occupation and governance. The courts

have specifically affirmed that Inuit hold Aboriginal title to their territories in Canada,”

(Campbell).

Metis Nation:

“...the Governing Members, through their registries and democratically elected

governance structures at the local, regional and provincial levels, are mandated and

authorized to represent the citizens who comprise the Métis Nation, including dealing

with collectively held Métis rights, interests and outstanding claims against the Crown;

….the Métis National Council is mandated by the Métis Nation General Assembly to

represent the Métis Nation at the national and international levels to advance issues of

collective importance;

...section 35 of the ​Constitution Act, 1982​, states that “the existing aboriginal and treaty

rights of the aboriginal peoples of Canada are hereby recognized and affirmed” and “the

‘aboriginal peoples of Canada’ includes the Indian, Inuit and Métis peoples”;
...in 2003 the Supreme Court of Canada in ​R. v. Powley​ recognized that Métis

communities, which emerged prior to effective control, possess Métis rights that are

protected as Aboriginal rights in section 35 of the ​Constitution Act, 1982​;

...in 2013 the Supreme Court of Canada in ​Manitoba Metis Federation​ ​v. Canada

(Attorney General)​ confirmed that the Crown is in a fiduciary relationship with the Métis

as a distinct Aboriginal people and stated that “the unfinished business of reconciliation

of the Métis people with Canadian sovereignty is a matter of national and constitutional

import”;

...in 2016 the Supreme Court of Canada in ​Daniels v. Canada (Indian Affairs and

Northern Development)​ declared that the Métis are within section 91(24) of the

Constitution Act, 1867​ and that “reconciliation with all of Canada’s Aboriginal peoples is

Parliament’s goal”;

...the Supreme Court of Canada has noted that section 35 of the ​Constitution Act, 1982

calls for a process of reconciliation between the Crown and Aboriginal peoples through

which the rights and outstanding claims of Aboriginal peoples are determined, recognized

and respected through honourable negotiations with the goal of reaching just and lasting

settlements;

...Canada and the Métis Nation are committed to reconciliation and a nation-to-nation,

government-to-government relationship, through regionally tailored exploratory

discussions and/or negotiations between Canada and the Métis National Council’s
Governing Members, in order to renew the relationship through cooperation, to further

Métis self-government, while respecting Métis rights and ending the status quo;

...Canada and the Métis Nation are further committed to reconciliation and a

nation-to-nation, government-to-government relationship through establishing a

permanent bilateral mechanism between Canada and the Métis National Council and its

Governing Members, as set out in the Accord, to enable annual priority setting, joint

policy development and progress to be measured on an ongoing basis,”

(“Canada-Metis”).

Bolivia:

68% of Bolivia’s population is indigenous and the country recognizes 36 native

languages as official languages of the country (“The World Factbook”). Bolivia

recognizes the sovereignty of indigenous nations but often tries to build highways or

other things through their land. This has sparked many protests and lots of outcry

(Cabezas).

Myanmar:

“In March 2015, the self-declared ‘Coalition of Indigenous Peoples in Myanmar/Burma,’

an umbrella organization representing 24 ethnic minority NGOs, submitted a report to the

UN Universal Periodic Review session of the Human Rights Council on Myanmar.2 In

that report, they brought attention to the Myanmar government’s lack of constitutional
recognition of “Indigenous peoples” (IPs) and to the violation of their rights as enshrined

in the 2007 UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP),”

[Link]

China:

“Using sovereignty as a shield, the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has generally

sought a pass in regard to enforcing international human rights compliance. Though it has

signed numerous human rights treaties, its state-centered approach has sought to avoid all

efforts at enforcement. This avoidance has nowhere been more absolute than its

disavowal of any obligations regarding indigenous peoples’ rights. The PRC actually

voted in support of the 2007 United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous

Peoples (UNDRIP) (UN General Assembly 2008). It then promptly disavowed any

obligation under the declaration, proclaiming there were no indigenous peoples in China.

It proclaimed 5,000 years of unity and harmony with its 55 designated national minorities

living in peace on their own land. Though a bloody history and recent protests by the

most prominent of these minorities – Tibetans, Uyghurs, and Mongols – would tend to

belie such assertion, the international community has rarely challenged this claim,”

(China & the UN).

Peru​:
“There are 4 million indigenous peoples in Peru, who are comprised of 55 groups

speaking 47 languages. Peru voted in favour of the UN Declaration on the Rights of

Indigenous Peoples in 2007 and has ratified ILO Convention 169. However, the country’s

indigenous population are still struggling with extractive activities, such as oil spills and

oil palm cultivation, on their territory.

According to the 2007 Census, Peru’s population includes more than 4 million
indigenous persons, of whom 83.11% are Quechua, 10.92% Aymara, 1.67% Ashaninka,
and 4.31% belong to other Amazonian indigenous peoples. The Database of Indigenous
or Original Peoples notes the existence in the country of 55 indigenous peoples who
speak 47 indigenous languages.

21% of Peru’s territory consists of mining concessions, which are superimposed upon
47.8% of the territory of peasant communities. Similarly, 75% of the Peruvian Amazon is
covered by oil and gas concessions.

Peru’s Constitution stipulates that the official languages are Spanish and, in areas where
they are predominant, Quechua, Aymara and other aboriginal languages. According to
the Ministry of Culture, there are 47 indigenous and native languages in the country.
Almost 3.4 million people speak Quechua and 0.5 million Aymara. Both languages are
predominant in the Coastal Andes area,” (The Wampis Nation).

Vietnam

Colonized by France and led to many wars, and also a huge change in language
 Brittan

Colonized everything

France

Colonized Vietnam and Africa, huge leftover language problem

South Africa

Australia

RIP the natives

Papua New guinea

New Zealand

One of the last “discovered” nations

Armenia

Mongolia

What used to be ruled by China, example of a native group making their own country

Taiwan

BIGGGGG Soverginty issue

HongKong

VI. Note to Delegates

 Because this debate is centered around ethics, something that differs between all

people, this debate will be complex, but don’t let that slow you down. Some starting

points for research are:

-Native/ indigenous populations in your country

-Colonization in your country

-Your countries view on how native populations should be treated

-What sovereignty is

-Your countries past actions in human rights issues.

Model Un is a great way to learn more than foreign affairs. Through this

experience we hope each delegate can learn how region and country can affect views on

ethical values, and that each of these views exists for a reason. With an understanding of

how entities create values, we can better understand and find common ground with those

different from us. Even if this topic may not be your favorite, we hope you will give it

your all! Good luck and don’t hesitate to contact us with any questions you may have.

Anna Alvis

512-944-0138

[Link].02@[Link]

Molly Bronner

512-574-4909

[Link]@[Link]
 Works Cited

Indian Affairs​, [Link]/frequently-asked-questions.

Visit Cherokee Nation | Cherokee Language,​

[Link]/history/Pages/[Link].

“Atrocities Against Native Americans.” ​United to End Genocide,​

[Link]/learn/past-genocides/native-americans/.

Blackfeet Country. “Welcome to the Blackfeet Nation Blackfeet Reservation.” ​Blackfeet

Country​, [Link]/.
Cabezas, Stanislaw Czaplicki. “Indigenous Activists Gain Momentum in Bolivia.” ​GCC News |

Al Jazeera,​ Al Jazeera, 29 Aug. 2011,

[Link]/indepth/opinion/2011/08/[Link].

Campbell, Robin. “An Introduction to Inuit Rights and Arctic Sovereignty.” ​LawNow Magazine,​

Centre for Public Legal Education Alberta, 27 Nov. 2018,

[Link]/introduction-inuit-rights-arctic-sovereignty/.

“Canada-Metis Nation Accord.” ​Prime Minister of Canada​, 13 Oct. 2017,

[Link]/eng/canada-metis-nation-accord.

“China & the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples: The Tibetan Case.”

E-International Relations,​

[Link]/2014/05/27/china-the-un-declaration-on-the-rights-of-indigenous-peoples-th

e-tibetan-case/.

“Frequently Asked Questions.” ​Native American Rights Fund,​

[Link]/frequently-asked-questions/.

Indian Country Today. “Professor Breaks Down Sovereignty and Explains Its Significance.”

[Link],​ Indian Country Today, 3 Jan. 2014,

[Link]/indiancountrytoday/archive/professor-breaks-down-sovereignty-and-explai

ns-its-significance-B8tl2DAAREa05ACzie58hw/.

“Indigenous Rights and Self-Determination in Mexico.” ​Cultural Survival​,

[Link]/publications/cultural-survival-quarterly/indigenous-rights-and-se

lf-determination-mexico.

Lee, Murray. “What Is Tribal Sovereignty? « Native American / American Indian Blog by
 Partnership With Native Americans.” ​Native American / American Indian Blog by

Partnership With Native Americans,​

[Link]/what-is-tribal-sovereignty/.

“Mashpee Wampanoag Tribe.” ​Mashpee Wampanoag Tribe​, [Link]/.

“Pine Ridge Indian Reservation - Government & Citizenship.” ​Black Hills Knowledge

Netowork,​

[Link]/community-profiles/pine-ridge/pine-ridge-indian-re

[Link]#.XE-qt2hKi00.

Rath, Arun. “A Sovereign (And Successful) Chickasaw Nation.” ​NPR,​ NPR, 27 Apr. 2009,

[Link]/templates/story/[Link]?storyId=103348033.

Snyder, Timothy. “The US Government Should Cede Territory Back to Native Americans |

Timothy Snyder.” ​The Guardian​, Guardian News and Media, 28 Apr. 2018,

[Link]/commentisfree/2018/apr/28/us-government-native-americans-timot

hy-snyder.

“Tribal Sovereignty.” ​CNTV​, [Link]/events/tribal-sovereignty.

University of California Berkeley School of Law Library. ​Roman Legal Tradition and the

Compilation of Justinian,​ [Link]/library/dynamic/[Link]?id=65.

“The Wampis Nation - the First Indigenous Autonomous Government in Peru.” ​IWGIA​,

[Link]/en/peru.

Webster, Richard A., et al. “Western Colonialism.” ​Encyclopædia Britannica,​ Encyclopædia

Britannica, Inc., 5 Nov. 2018, [Link]/topic/Western-colonialism.

“Welcome!” ​The Hopi Tribe​, [Link]/.

“The World Factbook: Bolivia.” ​Central Intelligence Agency,​ Central Intelligence Agency, 1

Feb. 2018, [Link]/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/[Link].