A
COMMON STRUGGLE:
TO
REGAIN CONTROL
Colin
Nicholas
The
indigenous peoples of Asia number more than 150 million. This is more than
half of the world's indigenous population. Labels such as cultural minorities,
hill tribes, aboriginals, tribals, natives and indigenous minorities may
apply well to local contexts but they inadequately describe the true picture.
Nation states have also manipulated definitions to suit their political
needs, labelling indigenous peoples as 'backward tribes', 'mountain peoples',
and 'remote area dwellers.' However, indigenous peoples do not wish
to be labelled as anything other than what they call themselves. Each group
sees itself as a distinct people.
Yet, despite their
cultural and ethnic diversity, indigenous peoples share many striking similarities
by which they are identified. For one, they trace their ancestry to the
original inhabitants of a territory which has been lost to others by conquest
or deceit. They consider themselves distinct from the dominant culture
and society of which they now find themselves a part of. And they have
their own language, religion, customs and worldview which they
are determined to transmit to future generations.
More importantly,
all indigenous peoples have a special relationship with their land, which
they see as being imbued with a spirituality and sacredness not generally
comprehensible by others. The land for them is more than just a habitat
or a political boundary; it is the basis of their social organisation,
economic system and cultural identification. And it is threats to their
land and their lifestyles that have come to signify the fate of indigenous
peoples the world over.
Realising the need
to unite in pursuit of their common aspirations, indigenous peoples movements
and organisations in Asia established the Asia Indigenous Peoples Pact.
This was to be a forum for indigenous peoples movements in Asia through
which indigenous peoples could address their problems, draw support from
each other, and plan, develop and launch programmes at various levels.
The Pact was formally inaugurated at its first general assembly in Bangkok
in May 1992.
At this general assembly,
it was very evident from the deliberations that the indigenous peoples
of Asia had many experiences in common. In particular, they were united
in that they all faced one aspiration: the struggle for self-determination.
SHARED EXPERIENCES
Indigenous peoples
in Asia are today living in a state of non-peace or conflict. There is
a general feeling of loss of control over their lands and, consequently,
their way of life and their destiny. Invariably, the common desire for
all indigenous peoples is to regain control.
Theirs is a history
of invasion, colonization, and domination. Sadly, however, history for
the indigenous peoples extend into the present day. Peoples like the East
Timorese, West Papuans and Nagas continue to battle invading forces while
most other indigenous peoples continue to experience subjugation by the
dominant society in a situation commonly referred to as internal colonization.
Through the polity
of the nation state, new worldviews and values are foisted onto the indigenous
peoples. Policy objectives of assimilation and integration are aimed at
eroding indigenous identity and status. At the same time, the current notion
of development invariably threatens the survival of many indigenous communities.
Not surprisingly, therefore, indigenous peoples in Asia consider western
industrial society and western values the greatest driving force behind
their obliteration as a people.
Within nation states
also, indigenous peoples are politically disenfranchised and economically
marginalized. The state, for its part, often has no qualms using whatever
means at its disposal to suppress and control indigenous peoples. Apart
from employing the military might and the legislative powers at its disposal
to undermine indigenous interests, nation states often adopt more subtle
means to control and subjugate a people.
Through the introduction
of education systems based on the perceptions of the dominant society,
younger generations of indigenous peoples are being encouraged to assimilate
with the dominant society. Inevitably, a future generation of indigenous
peoples will prevail one with weak roots to their land and ignorant of
their indigenous worldview. Religion has also been used to divide indigenous
communities or deny indigenous peoples their own spirituality.
More significantly,
however, nation states have learnt that they can ensure the annihilation
of the identity and status of indigenous peoples by removing their attachment
to the land. Once this spiritual and cultural basis of indigenous peoples
is destroyed through the destruction of the environment or as a result
of outright dispossession their ability to practise and continue their
way of life and worldview are threatened, initiating a slow, but sure,
cultural genocide.
But indigenous peoples
are not being passive to what is happening to them. They have formed alliances
and coalitions within nation states as well as on a global scale. They
have participated in international fora and have supported the move to
draft a Universal Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. More
importantly, they have asserted their right to self-determination and,
in varying forms, continue to struggle towards this end.
THE STRUGGLE
FOR SELF-DETERMINATION
Indigenous peoples
today essentially seek recognition by governments and the international
community of their existence, of their problems, and of their perspectives.
They seek recognition that their ancestral lands are essential for their
economic, social and spiritual development; and they also want their lands
back. They seek recognition that they have been robbed, oppressed and discriminated
against by the colonial and national governments; and they now want to
govern themselves. They seek recognition that they possess complex, flexible
and appropriate social institutions; and they now want the right to practise
them.
Indigenous peoples
also want recognition of their right to develop their own cultures, languages
and customs; and to be able to transmit them to future generations. They
also seek an end to racial discrimination, religious persecution, economic
marginalization, political oppression, militarization and all forms of
ethnocidal attacks on them.
In a broad sense,
therefore, indigenous peoples today are re-asserting their right to be
able to develop and progress as individuals and as a people, based on a
social order that they themselves determine. Hence, whatever their current
political and social situation today, and wherever they are to be found
today, indigenous peoples have one common aspiration: to reclaim their
right to self determination.
SELF-DETERMINATION:
WHAT IT IMPLIES
While the particular
components of the indigenous peoples' definition of the term may differ
from one group to another, their demand for the right to self-determination
would generally include, but not be limited to, the following:
- the right to the
ownership of their lands as the territorial base for the existence of their
populations;
- the
right to use, manage and dispose of all natural resources found within
their ancestral lands;
- the right to
control their own economies, and the right to economic prosperity;
- the right to restore,
manage, develop and practise their culture, language, traditions and way
of life in accordance with their worldview, and to educate their children
to them;
- the right to determine
the form of self-government, and to uphold indigenous political systems;
- the right to engage
in foreign relations and trade if they so desire;
- the right to form
alliances and federations with other indigenous peoples for the attainment
of common goals; and
- the right to a life
of peace and security.
Self-determination,
therefore, not only involves restoring to the indigenous peoples their
ownership and control over traditional territories, but also involves allowing
them to re- establish their indigenous social order as they themselves
determine it.
Nevertheless, while
self-determination may be the common aspiration of all indigenous peoples,
it does not necessarily follow that all indigenous peoples see eye-to-eye
as to how to achieve it. Prevailing realities in the political environment
that the indigenous peoples currently find themselves in, largely dictates
the specific manner in which their right to self-determination is to be
achieved.
In the main, however,
indigenous struggles for self-determination follow two paths: the quest
for full independence and the demand for genuine autonomy.
SOVEREIGNTY
AND INDEPENDENCE
For some indigenous
groups, such as the Nagas and the Mizos in India, the East Timorese and
the West Papuans in Indonesia, and the Kachins and Karens in Myanmar, nothing
short of full independence from the colonizing or national governments
is their demand. These indigenous peoples contend that their sovereignty
was never surrendered to the invading forces, and consequently the struggle
for full independence is actually a struggle to defend their sovereignty.
It is also to be
noted that wherever indigenous peoples are seeking full independence, the
struggle invariably takes on the form of armed conflict.
Armed struggle is
resorted to not only because an appeal to reason is no longer available,
but more so because justice for the indigenous peoples is longer forthcoming
from the invading colonizers. And where there is no justice, there is invariably
violence. The responsibility for violence must therefore lie at the feet
of those who deny justice, and who themselves resort to violence to subdue
and repress a people.
For the indigenous
peoples faced with invasion of their lands, and where their continued identity
and survival as a people are at stake, there is a willingness to repel
violent domination with violence but only as a last resort, when all other
methods fail, and when faced with violent repression itself.
The struggle for
full independence therefore represents the ultimate aspiration of all indigenous
peoples: reclaiming their status as a sovereign people, and establishing
their right to total self-determination.
GENUINE AUTONOMY
WITHIN THE NATION STATE
Often, however,
existing political realities require that the indigenous peoples seek realizable
goals as an initial concession towards the ultimate goal, if not as an
end in itself.
Most indigenous groups
therefore, especially where they represent a minority in the nation state
they have been incorporated into, opt for genuine autonomy. This is the
case for the Tribal Filipinos and the Bangsa Moro in the Philippines, the
Ainu in Japan, the Adivasis in India, and the Karen and Akha in Thailand,
amongst others.
By genuine autonomy
is meant the genuine and full guarantee to indigenous peoples for self-governance
within the framework of the existing sovereign nation state. Implicit in
this term is the recognition of the indigenous peoples' right to their
ancestral domain, and their right to conserve, develop, utilize and dispose
the natural resources found therein.
Genuine autonomy
also involves giving full recognition to the social, political, religious
and cultural traditions of the indigenous peoples. It would also entail
the establishment of genuine structures which ensures the full participation
by the people in all matters affecting themselves.
However, it must
be stressed that genuine autonomy can only be achieved within the context
of a nation state that is founded on complementary structures for the national
peoples as a whole. Genuine autonomy cannot be achieved if, for instance,
the nation state continues to be structured on the capitalist model, or
if indigenous territories continue to be occupied by foreign military bases.
In short, indigenous peoples do not want control over existing institutions
and structures; instead, they want these institutions and structures to
be removed, and be replaced with those of their own.
THE PATH TO
SELF-DETERMINATION
In the struggle
for self-determination, whether it is expressed as the demand for genuine
autonomy or for full independence, the indigenous peoples in the region
have taken various approaches and strategies towards realizing their ultimate
aspiration.
Some of these measures
are categorized below, though it should be stressed that the list is not
exhaustive.
ESTABLISHING
UNITY
Indigenous peoples
have realized that their struggle for self-determination can only advance
through unity among all indigenous peoples. They have also realized that
efforts at creating divisions between themselves exist overtly and covertly;
as in the case of the Akha and Karen in Thailand when the introduction
of non-indigenous religions divide a village into followers and non-followers,
or as in the case of Taiwan where the government classifies the indigenous
peoples there, literally, as lowland mountain-people and mountain mountain-people
in an apparently deliberate attempt at 'divide-and-rule.'
In response to the
need to be united, indigenous groups have formed alliances and federations
with other indigenous groups who have similar aspirations and who are faced
with similar problems. Traditional institutions of the indigenous social
have been used to bring together such groups as was successfully done in
the Cordilleras when the bi-lateral peace pacts between the Tribal Filipinos
led to the multi-lateral Cordillera Bodong Association.
ADOPTING NONVIOLENT
METHODS
Depending on the
receptiveness of the colonizing government, indigenous groups have utilized
'soft' methods aimed at getting some concessions. Litigation through the
courts have been resorted to in order to get rulings in favour of the indigenous
peoples (as was the case when the Naga Peoples' Movement for Human Rights
won court decisions against the actions of the Indian military occupying
their lands). Legal litigation have also been used, though with only a
limited success, to coerce national governments to enforce rights and guarantees
for the indigenous peoples which are enshrined in the national constitutions.
Negotiation has also
been resorted to in an attempt to achieve an amicable solution to the prevailing
problem. So too have other nonviolent tactics such as civil disobedience,
boycotts and non-cooperation. At times, the existing political framework
was also exploited as when the tribal peoples in Bihar (India) formed their
own political party, the Jarkhand Party, which at its height in the 1950s
held over 30 seats in the state assembly and became a major opposition
party.
CREATING AWARENESS
Indigenous peoples
have also seen the need to embark on conscientization programmes
both for their own peoples as well as for the non-indigenous population.
In this respect, protest marches, rallies and demonstrations, as well the
media, forums, and other platforms have been utilized to inform others
about their situation and their aspirations.
Among the indigenous
peoples themselves, much awareness-raising and conscientization were needed,
especially in cases where the indigenous identity and social order were
on the verge of extinction. Traditional institutions, such as the village
council or traditional communal feasts, have been used to expound and discuss
communal issues on a more political level.
COALITION WITH
OTHER SECTORS
Indigenous peoples
today also recognize that there are other sectors in the national society
whose members are being equally oppressed by the system. Workers, women,
and the peasantry, for example, are also victims of the national ideology.
Furthermore, it is also true that indigenous peoples themselves constitute
these sectors as well, particularly the peasantry. Recognizing that there
are areas for cooperation in the effort to transform the present society,
indigenous peoples have collaborated with these sectors in the national
society.
Similarly, indigenous
peoples have also recognised that there are genuinely progressive elements
within other sectors of society: students, public interest groups, and
other non- governmental organizations, amongst others. Apart from their
being genuinely sympathetic to the cause of the indigenous peoples, sometimes
the 'cause' is a common one, as when indigenous and non-indigenous peoples
protest the building of nuclear plants or dams in traditional lands on
a land rights as well as an environmental platform.
SEEKING INTERNATIONAL
SUPPORT
Indigenous peoples
have also recognized the important role that international solidarity plays
in bringing them a step closer to their goals. National governments have
been known to give in, albeit more as a concession rather than in totality,
to the demands of indigenous peoples especially if such demands are backed
by the international community. The struggles of the East Timorese and
those of the Penans in Sarawak are examples of instances where massive
international support was able to be mobilized in their favour. Inevitably,
however, it would seem that even international furore and concern often
give way to vested national interests.
RESORT TO ARMED
CONFLICT
There are occasions,
however, when the futility of the forms of nonviolent protest is evident.
Those who are bent on possessing the lands of the indigenous peoples, those
who want to colonize and control them, invariably resort to the use of
unrestrained violence and repression to achieve their intentions. In such
circumstances, where their own individual lives as well as the survival
of their race is at stake, indigenous peoples are forced to abandon their
peaceful struggle.
These are some of
the measures which indigenous peoples have taken in the pursuit of their
ultimate goal of self-determination. Again, it should be stressed that
the above processes do not follow any order of priority; rather, using
a good eye of the prevailing political situation, indigenous peoples have
used some or all of these processes simultaneously in their effort to achieve
their goal - to regain control.
