Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbatt!cbosgd!ihnp4!ltuxa!we53!wucs!wucec2!wucfua!sorsen
From: sorsen@wucfua.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.followup
Subject: Re: American Indians - Persecution of? (warning-long)
Message-ID: <147@wucfua.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 6-Jul-86 19:33:14 EDT
Article-I.D.: wucfua.147
Posted: Sun Jul  6 19:33:14 1986
Date-Received: Tue, 8-Jul-86 04:29:36 EDT
References: <688@argon.idec.stc.co.uk>
Reply-To: sorsen@wucec2.UUCP (Michael L. Sorsen)
Organization: Washington U. in St. Louis
Lines: 83
Keywords: Indians "Long Walk" Navijo-Hopi Land dispute
Summary: It's more complicated than it looks, and nothing like SA

[line eater food]

              The persecution referred to in the subject line involves
a large group of Navajo indians who
have violated federal law by remaining on land belonging to the Hopi
Indians. The land involved is part of the original Hopi reservation
granted to them circa 1880 by the U.S.  The land is 
is located in north-eastern Arizona.

          Numerous liberal and ecologically minded oraganizations
are rallying behind the Navajo squatters because they beleive
that if clear ownership of the land in question is determined,
the Hopi and/or Navajo tribal councils will lease large tracts
of the land for strip mining and other ecologically harmfull exploitation.

          Being liberal and ecologically minded myself, I took
the opportunity to look into the situation first-hand while on vacation
to the area. My findings are below. For those who cannot go to the 
southwest to see things for themselves, I recommend a book on the dispute:
"The Second Long Walk", published by the University of New Mexico Press.
"The Second Lond Walk" is a biased towards the Navajo squatters' side 
of the issue, but it gives you enough background to let you form
your own opinion. The title refers to a forced march from north-eastern
Arizona to central New Mexico that took place in the late 19th century.
          
          Many Navajo died during the Long Walk and the current dispute
has its' roots in the events that led up to and followed the Long Walk.
After the Navajo were released (the U.S. having realized how close
it was to committing genocide), some Navajo settled in lands 
reserved for the Hopi. Eventually this produced the current situation.
          But because of the complexity of the 
dispute, the news media have failed to give an accurate description
of what is going on, and numberous well meaning people and organizations
have lept half-cocked into the fray after hearing the position of only one
of the parties to the dispute.

       It is good to see some concern for the American Indians, since
we in the U.S. have benefitted so much at their expense, but the
Navajo-Hopi land dispute is not a simple case of Anglos (whites) stepping
on Indians in order to get at something of value.
 
       It is true the U.S. government has made a mess of this situation.
But there is plenty of blame to spread around, and the Hopi elders that
are going around publicising this as a land grab by the energy
companies (e.g. strip mining interests) deserve their share of the blame.
And while we are dividing up blame, don't forget those energy companies
and the greedy tribal councils that lease large tracts of land
for such ecologically un-sound projects as strip mines and coal 
slurry pipelines.

       Unfortunately, the various indian cultures are being absorbed into
the Anglo (white) culture. The Navajo have seen this coming for a long
time (a side effect of the Long Walk, I suspect), but some of the Hopi elders
refuse to see the obvious, and are still fighting both councils' efforts
to make a smoother transition from being a seperate society to a minority
within a larger society. It is my feeling that they are using the dispute
to gain publicity for their own dispute with the Hopi council about
how to deal with the infulence of Anglo culture on Hopi culture. 
 
       Last I heard, the Navajo and Hopi councils
were convinced that no mass relocation would take place. This does not
mean that the land will not be leased for strip mining, however.
Even if the Navajo squatters get to stay, it is likely some agreement will
be made to allow leasing the land for exploitation. 

       The irony of all of the concern over the strip mining is that
the geologists could be wrong about what is under the Joint Use Area
(the land in question.) When the Hopi sold oil leases in 
the 70's for an area just to the south of the JUA that was thought to be a 
giant oil field, all the oil wells were dry. The Hopi made several 
million dollars off of the energy companies in the process.
It is entirely possible that the dispute ends up being a fight over 
who gets the money to look for coal that isn't there. I can always hope.

       As for the comparison between this situation and the South African
re-settlement of the African tribal homelands, I suggest that anyone
interested in drawing such parallels should at least read "The Second 
Long Walk", if only to get more convincing evidence for the 
claim that the U.S. is not interested in human rights within it's own
borders. I think that after you study the situation, you will
see how that parallel doesn't make any sense.

Mike Sorsen (Sorsen@wucec2.uucp  or SORSEN@WUVMD.BITNET)