Tribal Council of the Standing Rock Sioux (2016)

Transcription

1 Youth Movements: Protest! Power! Progress? Tribal Council of the Standing Rock Sioux (2016) Addressing the Dakota Access Pipeline Director: Amita Shukla Assistant Director: Avery Haley-Lock

2 CJMUNC Highland Park Model United Nations/Congress(HPMUNC) This document was created solely for the use of Central Jersey Model United Nations and Congress (CJMUNC) Other uses are not permitted without explicit permission from HPMUNC. Please contact us at hpmunc@gmail.com.

3 CJMUNC INDEX POLICY DILEMMA. 3 CHRONOLOGY. 3-6 ACTORS AND INTERESTS 6-7 PROJECTIONS AND IMPLICATIONS 7 CAUSES.. 8 DISCUSSION QUESTIONS.9 BIBLIOGRAPHY....10

4 CJMUNC Policy Dilemma The Dakota Access Pipeline, if completed, will move half a billion gallons of crude oil from North Dakota to Illinois each day. Although the route does not cross inside the Sioux reservation, it comes within a half a mile, crossing beneath a river called Lake Oahe. The pipeline route is on Army Corps controlled land, which authorized the project in late April of Most of the pipeline s mile route has already been completed, with the exception of the lake Oahe area. This presents several issues for the Sioux tribe, the most pressing of which is by far the safety and cleanliness of water. The Sioux tribe regularly uses the water from Lake Oahe for drinking and washing, meaning an oil spill would be detrimental the tribe s water source and health. The treat of a spill is possible, with increasing U.S. dependence on oil and pipeline construction, the number of accidents has risen greatly. According to federal data, accidents such as leaks and spills from petroleum and oil lines have increased by nearly 60 percent since If put into use,( Tribune wire ) DAPL would transport as much as 570,000 barrels of crude oil every day (Time Magazine), leaving the possibility for a massive spill. In addition, the pipeline risks the destruction of significant cultural and historic artifacts. The Sioux Tribe s historic preservation officer, Tim Mentz, discovered several artifacts such as stone effigies and burial sites along the path of the proposed route. Several sites have already been destroyed when construction bulldozed a two mile patch of land in September. Chronology s: Negotiation of the Treaties of Fort Laramie and Native Uprisings In 1851 the U.S. negotiated the Treaty of Fort Laramie with several plains tribes including the Sioux. Under the treaty the Sioux were confined to federally assigned territory for a yearly annuity. However, excessive hunting of game, mismanagement of annuities, and the challenges of a smaller territory resulted in a lack of food and mass starvation in the tribe. This caused unrest and resentment towards the U.S., which spurred the Sioux uprising in 1862, an attempt to take back old territory. 400 settlers, 70 troops, and 30 Sioux were killed as a result. An additional 38 Sioux were sentenced to death and hanged for participating. This was the largest mass execution in U.S. history. Shortly after the uprising the tribe was relocated to a territory in Dakota. Several smaller uprisings occurred in resulting from disputes over the construction of the Bozeman Trail, which cut through important hunting grounds. In 1868 the U.S. agreed to the Second Treaty of Fort Laramie which closed the Bozeman Trail and gave the Sioux tribe full ownership of the land in present state South Dakota. Years later, however, an expedition led by General George Custer discovered gold in the Black Hills on Sioux territory. Soon thousands of miners driven by the Gold Rush swarmed to the Black Mountains, increasing tensions with the tribe. The U.S. Army was called to move against bands of Sioux hunting in their territory, disregarding treaty rights. This drove many Sioux to leave

5 CJMUNC their reservation for a camp near the Little Bighorn River in Montana, led by Sitting Bull and Crazy Horse. The U.S. War Department ordered the more than 10,000 Native Americans gathered at the sites to return to their reservations. This dispute led to the Battle of Little Bighorn and preceding battles, after which the U.S. efforts to confine the tribes saw most of the Sioux returned to reservations around South Dakota. In the following years after buffalo herds and wild game populations dwindled to near extinction, supplies and annuities were frequently denied or stolen, and starvation was rampant. In the late 19th century the Ghost Dance movement became popular in the Sioux tribe, promising the return of native lands and buffalo, and the departing of whites. Federal troops suppressed Ghost dance demonstrations, and killed chief Sitting Bull during an arrest. Once again several hundred Sioux, seeking to escaped the torment, left to an area south of the reservation. This ended in a massacre of over 200 Sioux, now known as the Battle of Wounded Knee. April- August 2016: US Army Corps of Engineers introduce plans for Dakota Access Pipeline April 2016 is the starting point of this issue. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers introduced plans for the pipeline route to the public for comments, hearing those including environmental and cultural concerns. The Corps found that no historic properties will be affected by the pipeline crossing. The Corps, owning the land, later approved the route on July 25th for the pipeline to cross the Missouri River in Lake Oahe. On Aug. 4 The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe sued the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The Sioux Tribe argues the Corps violated the National Historic Preservation Act and 204 clean water act, and failed to adequately consult tribe members before approving the pipeline. The tribe has asked that the court to withdraw the construction permit on the pipeline. The company overseeing the pipeline s construction, Dakota Access LLC, later countersued the Sioux tribe claiming that protesters "halted construction activities" on the pipeline. September 2nd-8th, 2016: Sioux Tribe Sues Engineer Corps On Friday September 2nd, the Sioux Tribe filed court papers due to damage to historic sites found after surveying the land. The tribe reported finding areas of significant cultural and historic value and "significant Native artifacts and sacred sites" demolished after the bulldozing of an area near the reservation by Lake Oahe, and others to be demolished along the path of the proposed pipeline. Upon the invitation of a private landowner, Tim Mentz, the Tribe s Archeological Expert reported important artifact and stone effigies, saying: "I surveyed this land and we confirmed multiple graves and specific prayer sites, (...) Portions, and possibly complete sites, have been taken out entirely." Clashes between private security officers and demonstrators began a day later after protesters broke through a wire barrier at the pipeline construction site and drove away several bulldozers. Security officers lashed out using pepper spray and mace, as well as canine units using dogs. This resulted in numerous injuries and several accounts of dog bites.

6 CJMUNC September 6th-9th: Protests and construction continue despite pending lawsuit On September 6th construction of the pipeline in Lake Oahe was suspended temporarily, pending a full decision on the tribe's earlier lawsuit against the Army Corps. On September 8th, the governor of North Dakota Jack Dalrymple activated the North Dakota National Guard to monitor demonstrations with local law enforcement. Around 500 national guard troops and several military vehicles were present on the site. Several clashes between demonstrators and law enforcement broke out, resulting in 37 arrests. Dave Archambault II, a spokesperson for the tribe called upon protestors to remain peaceful, saying: Any act of violence hurts our cause and is not welcome here, (...) Even if the outcome of the court s ruling is not in our favor, we will continue to explore every lawful option and fight against the construction of the pipeline." On Sept. 9th the Standing Rock Sioux request for an injunction to temporarily stop construction was denied by U.S. District Judge James Boasberg, who ruled that construction on the Dakota Access Pipeline may continue. However, directly after the ruling three federal agencies, the Justice Department, the Department of the Army and the Interior Department, announced in a joint statement requesting the Energy Transfer Partners to voluntary pause all construction activity within 20 miles east or west of Lake Oahe, saying: The Army will not authorize constructing the Dakota Access pipeline on Corps land bordering or under Lake Oahe until it can determine whether it will need to reconsider any of its previous decisions regarding the Lake Oahe site under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) or other federal laws. Therefore, construction of the pipeline on Army Corps land bordering or under Lake Oahe will not go forward at this time. The Army will move expeditiously to make this determination, as everyone involved including the pipeline company and its workers deserves a clear and

7 CJMUNC timely resolution. In the interim, we request that the pipeline company voluntarily pause all construction activity within 20 miles east or west of Lake Oahe (NPR). The agencies stated their support for peaceful protest, acknowledged the need for a serious discussion on nationwide reform to tribal input in infrastructure projects, and organized a formal consultation to discuss such issues. The agencies now invite tribes to formal, government-to-government consultations on two questions: (1) within the existing statutory framework, what should the federal government do to better ensure meaningful tribal input into infrastructure-related reviews and decisions and the protection of tribal lands, resources, and treaty rights; and (2) should new legislation be proposed to Congress to alter that statutory framework and promote those goals. October 12-onward Despite this, weeks later on Oct. 12 Energy Transfer Partners continued construction on the pipeline. Shortly afterwards 27 demonstrators were arrested. This committee is meeting on October 13th Actors and Interests US Army Corps of Engineers: The Army Corps controls the land at the site of the Dakota Access Pipeline, and other areas around the Missouri River including parts of lake Oahe. Energy Transfer Partners: A Texas based natural gas and propane company organizing the construction of the Dakota Access Pipeline. The company argues existing oil pipelines already run underneath Lake Oahe. Energy Transfer Partners: A company that has entertained some tribal input, and has rerouted and made adjustments to the pipeline numerous times, all that have failed to reach consensus. The company has hired private security officers which on several occasions lashed out at

8 CJMUNC demonstrators. The company has also prohibited the Sioux Tribe s Archeological Expert from surveying the land on the route of the pipeline for historic and culturally significant artifacts. Projections and Implications Many immediate issues arise in the Sioux Tribe demonstrations. This committee should attempt to address the issues of police and protester violence, the possibility of a wanted outcome, and the terms by which protesting will cease. Civil Disobedience and Acts of Violence On several occasions, acts of violence have arose against demonstrators by local law enforcement and private security guards. Police utilize equipment such as pepper spray, mace, and police dogs, which have wounded protesters multiple times. In recent months around 500 national guard troops and several military vehicles have arrived on site. (NPR.) This leads to the issue of possible clashes being easily escalated to a highly dangerous point. The Sioux tribe has issued several statements requesting protests to remain nonviolent. However nonviolence does not equate disengagement, and is where the debate splits sides. Protesters can still engage construction, such as through blocking bulldozers and construction vehicles, while remaining nonviolent. Civil disobedience has been practiced in movements throughout history, one example being the Greensboro lunch counter sit ins. This tactic has not been fully accepted with consensus in the tribe, however smaller groups have attempted similar acts. This tactic runs the risk of sparking police violence, as was seen in the class between security guards and demonstrators in September. However, civil disobedience and sit ins are often the most immediate way of halting a development and drawing media attention. On the other hand the tribe must be cognizant of the growing number of people joining the camp, and the effects of civil disobedience. The Sioux tribe has been sued by Energy Transfer Partners for obstructing pipeline construction. Committee must determine how civil disobedience should or should not be used in demonstrations, and with respect to recent developments in law enforcement.

9 CJMUNC Causes Federal Communication and Lack of Reform The tribe has sued the Army Corps of Engineers, which controls the land surrounding the route and permitted construction of the Pipeline. For the most part, The Dakota Access Pipeline requires no federal approval, as it is almost entirely on private land, thus no general approval from the federal government is needed. However, the area surrounding Lake Oahe is under Army Corps controlled land. Being federally owned land, the construction permit process for the area around Lake Oahe is subject to multiple federal statutes. Lack of Legal Rights The Sioux tribe argues that the Army Corps violated National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) when permitting construction by failing to participate in tribal consultations in the planning process. That statute requires that federal agencies, in this case the Army Corps, consult with Native American tribes before issuing construction permits on or affecting sites of cultural or religious significance. In section 106 of this Act a federal agency is required to consider the effect of its construction project on Native American lands of historic, cultural or religious significance. The Sioux tribe alleges adequate tribal consultation on the pipeline was denied, and effects of construction were not considered.

10 CJMUNC Discussion questions 1. What is the end goal of the demonstrations? 2. How can the committee work with the US government to try to stop the Dakota Access Pipeline? 3. What terms must be met in order for demonstrations to cease? 4. If terms are not met, at what point should demonstrations end, if at all? 5. With the growing volume of demonstrators living in the camps, how should the tribe provide for their needs? Should the tribe be responsible for the demonstrator s safety? 6. In what ways can the Sioux youth be empowered to help end this conflict? 7. How should the committee respond to police violence?

11 CJMUNC Bibliography Works Referenced Worland, Justin. Dakota Access Pipeline: What to Know About the Controversy. Time, Time, 28 Oct. 2016, time.com/ /dakota-access-pipeline-standing-rock-sioux/. Hersher, Rebecca. Key Moments In The Dakota Access Pipeline Fight. NPR, NPR, 22 Feb. 2017, peline-fight. STANDING ROCK SIOUX TRIBE v. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS,. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, earthjustice.org/sites/default/files/files/order-denying-pi.pdf. Treaty of Fort Laramie (1868). Our Documents - Treaty of Fort Laramie (1868), Britannica, The Editors of Encyclopaedia. Sioux. Encyclopædia Britannica, Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc., 20 Dec. 2017, reports, Tribune wire. Federal Data: As Oil Production Soars, so Do Pipeline Leaks. Chicagotribune.com, 22 May 2015,