| We have, as a company, no ability to make a
determination about when they voted or didn't vote. That was up to them.
They had to make a choice. There is no question that along the way we
had very candid discussions about the need to move with/at a relatively
rapid speed. But that's not pressuring the government. They could have
chosen not to continue, not to have a vote. They chose to do so.
(WERU FM interview with James Mitchell, Quoddy Bay LLC --
9/21/04)
Just because a few deem it expedient, is LNG on Tribal land a forgone
conclusion? Whether written or oral, contracts are supposed to state the
obligations of, and benefits to, the parties in question. Reasonably
enough, contracts, agreements or implied contracts are also creatures of
domestic legal terminology. At its best and most basic, the search for
truth about LNG (an energy mega-project) on tribal lands and in tribal
lives needs to include indigenous voices. Otherwise, the concept of
"cultural damage" will never be a consideration in the impact
assessments.
With that said, I will propose several questions to the people of
Maine (and New England): Have Passamaquoddys, as the actual occupants
and owners of tribal land and territorial waters, been adequately and
explicitly informed about the complexities and consequences implicit in
the potential siting of a liquefied natural gas import terminal on
tribal lands, a residential area populated by members of the
Passamaquoddy tribe? Better still - do local, tribal electoral
irregularities?domestic interferences brought on by the inducements of
corporate interests?cause any concern about Quoddy Bay LLC's recent
announcement that an agreement to "lease tribal lands" to an
undisclosed entity is pending? Could Quoddy Bay LLC in the guise of a
party having a genuine interest in the wellbeing and future of the
Passamaquoddy people actually be the undisclosed entity planning to
capitalize on the location and advantageous tax benefits of the tribe?
Put another way, can Passamaquoddys consider the specific purposes of
any contract in light of the fact that there has literally been no
disclosure concerning the proposed LNG import terminal? More important - how
can distressed communities be assured that local officials are safeguarding
their interests, when the same officials have personal interest in the
outcome. As we have seen in Maine's coastal communities this past year, the
situation is now so acute, critical awareness of unjust social
structures and political relationships is our only hope if any healthy debate about LNG
can
occur statewide.
Considering the historical patterns proving how, time and time again, indigenous people are left insolvent, ignoring the issue of traditional
life ways is antithetical to indigenous culture/tradition. Therefore, any
lease, any sale or any transfer of ownership of tribal lands and territorial
waters should always be scrutinized. Instead of mistaking corporate intrusion
for an "internal tribal matter," all those concerned about
indigenous freedom and independence need to critically debate issues relating to
the erosion of Passamaquoddy culture. Sovereignty issues are not
always glamorous - issues of sovereignty are after all more often messy
than they are neat, and not simple but remarkably complex.
While many of us openly question the validity of any transfer of
ownership of tribal land, others call for a hands-off-approach. Why?
"Internal tribal matter" is not an umbrella term to be used to protect
against exposing demonstrations of disproportionate leveraging of political
power. In that, the State of Maine or its representatives have never been
effective guardians of indigenous rights. But when tribal officials are forced to
turn to the same authorities that have a vested interest in the outcome, the
standard of protection for native communities are made insufficient,
maybe even
impossible. It's not wise, however, to conclude that the only structures
and processes indigenous people have available are the replicas of
Western models. Aside from the tribal council structure, we do have our own
social processes, where making links between the micro-political situation to
the macro one is part of our critical analysis; and where emphasis is not
just focused on the individual right but also on the collective rights of the
Passamaquoddy nation.
An ethical breech in democratic process (a bypass of local approvals) is
hardly all that is at issue. Bringing to light whether
Passamaquoddy people have freely chosen to "lease lands" and whether or not those
initiating an agreement are truly considering the best interests of all Passamaquoddy people is what is at issue here. Are the parties involved
equally represented? In my view, Passamaquoddy land ownership interests are
being forced into closed-door negotiations with a domestic entity (State of Maine)
and multinational corporations (an unknown entity) without any oversight and
monitoring. Whose responsibility is it to ensure corporate
accountability within structures that have historically operated adversely to
indigenous people? Should the corporate veil of secrecy be allowed to drive Maine
Indian policy today? Does NAFTA have any application on tribal land and
territorial waters? Does F.E.R.C. intend to preempt authority regardless of
community objections?
While a few tribal leaders and Quoddy Bay LLC, the developer desiring to
get their hands on tribal lands and benefits, would have the public
believe that the so called "vote" whether or not to proceed to discuss
a development was a victory for them. The "non-binding "
referendum that was forced upon tribal members, which now the aforementioned parties call a
"mandate from the grassroots up" was far from a victory. In
effect, our consent to negotiate any terms for any lease is made suspect by the fact
that 68% of our voting population either disagreed entirely with altering our
environment from residential neighborhoods to a heavy industrial complex
or have not even been given opportunity to decide. If traditional life ways
have no bearing on the rationale to propose an LNG import terminal on
tribal lands - be assured - sovereignty is being eroded, consent does not
exist, and questions of conflicts of interest?at tribal and state
government levels?are magnified.
Even if for the sake of argument" decision-making" is central
to sovereignty, what kind of processes are necessary to establish open
systems on reservations in Maine? I mean, if what you have in the mix include state
interference, corporate encroachment, and factional tribal leadership;
where one's dissent is met with exaggerated comments that suggests no
readdress; where any attempt to counter a potentially harmful project like LNG is
discouraged on every level; can one reasonably conclude that there is a
"hostile corporate take-over" occurring at Sipayik?
Are there any assurances the Maine Human Rights Commission can make to the
voiceless in Maine - if Passamaquoddy human rights are simply being ignored. What about our civil liberties? We call attention to our
rights. It's supposed to be a given that as Passamaquoddy people, we have a
right to fully participate in the social, political, economic decisions that
affect our lives at community, state, national and international levels.
Even in this informational age, disempowering Passamaquoddy people on these
fundamental levels would not only be futile, it's an outdated mode of
politics to intentionally try to take away the right of Passamaquoddy people to tell
their own stories and represent themselves.
Every Passamaquoddy deserves to know whom these multinational
corporations are; deserve to know the real issues, as well as, knowing the real price
attached to LNG. More than this, we deserved ample opportunity to
examine clear and understandable information about the "proposed" LNG
import terminal being sought for Passamaquoddy Bay.
What are we dealing with? It's nothing new, it's the leveraging of corporate/state/factional politics - it's even less about tribal
sovereignty - it's the same-old, age-old tactic, which continues to
repeat over time. The promise of money and perks usually brings with it social
disruption and a scramble by speculators to score. The spirit of
sovereignty cannot afford to be eroded with a breech in process; the dynamic Quoddy Bay LLC
has ushered in should be made visible for others to view. Passamaquoddys
deserve to pose questions, as well as, follow through with the question
about any potential transfer of ownership of tribal lands to our satisfaction.
Land loss is, after all, the greatest threat to indigenous survival.
As Indigenous people we not only have a right to make decisions - we have a right to control our resources and environments. If Maine's
people want LNG in Maine remain silent on the issue - but if Maine's people are
dissatisfied with the current lack of open debate, which is what I
suspect, call into question the material evidence of interference of tribal
procedures, ask for public hearings, demand respectful processes,
support traditional life ways and engage direct democracy, as I ask for an
apology from those who rushed into this arrogant display-this erosion of spirit. At
the very least, vote in the upcoming election for those willing to defeat
the divisive politics currently running unchecked in Maine. Hold your
elected officials accountable to the fact that Maine's promise for a quality of
life doesn't have to be at anybody else's expense. LNG in Maine calls for
an open debate - LNG should not be preordained by a non-visible entity. |
