|
|
|
COAIM BLOG CO AIM LATEST NEWS MEDIA
|
Akwesasne Notes Mohawk Nation 11 November 1986 Dear Relatives: Although reports had reached us here in the West that Notes is under increasing attack due to your support of the Indian resistance in Nicaragua, it was not until reading the letters in the Autumn, 1986 issue that the extent of the reaction became clear. One of the more troubling conclusions to be drawn from the critical letters is the continuing lack of understanding by non-Natives concerning the ultimate aspirations of many Indian nations. Despite all of the action and reaction in Indian Politics over the past twenty years, many non-Natives continue to insist that indigenous liberation must fit within the European paradigm. Although indigenous peoples are clearly and firmly establishing their own agenda for liberation, many non-Indians continue in their arrogant insinuation that Indian peoples are too primitive and underdeveloped to pursue any meaningful struggle, absent European-based analysis. As the issues and dilemmas facing indigenous self-determination become more complex, and as the inevitable conflicts with the socio-economic systems of settler states flare into confrontation, the shallowness of support among non-Native sectors becomes ever clearer. Such shallowness is particularly apparent in cases of indigenous peoples resisting the encroachment of Marxist states (e.g,, Ethiopia, Burma, Nicaragua). While your critics obviously would support indigenous resistance in Chile or Guatemala or Namibia; the support diminishes when the resistance, however similar it may be from the indigenous perspective crosses the European-based ideological border. The implication is that so long as Native aspirations are subordinated to the larger, class-conscious, revolutionary cause, or so long as Indian self-determination is perceived as a peripheral issue and not subject to immediate actualization, then the American Left is comfortable embracing their Indian "allies." Now that the realities of indigenous self-determination are confronting leftist settler states as well as rightist ones, indigenous resistance is labeled "counter-revolutionary" or "separatist." Aside from the larger, and very serious, lack of respect and/or understanding of the essence of indigenous national rights by many non-Natives, your recent letters section also indicated even a shallow understanding of the specific issues and policies affecting the Indian nations of Miskitia. Among the more absurd charges found in those letters is that Brooklyn Rivera, General Coordinator of MISURASATA, has always been a CIA-funded pawn who is "living in expensive hotels in Honduras." Any person who follows and understands the Politics of the region knows that Rivera does not live in Honduras, and has been allowed to visit Honduras only once in the past few years. Last year, I was invited, along with Russell Means and others, to visit the Miskito, Sumo and Rama peoples in their own territories. During our visit we lived and traveled with Brooklyn Rivera. We visited the MISURASATA house in Costa Rica, a house no larger than the average American apartment, which Brooklyn shared with at least fifteen other people. The household ate one meal per day. If the CIA has been funding Rivera and MISURASATA, the money certainly is hidden well. We saw many seriously wounded MISURASATA warriors who were without medical attention. Surely, a resistance organization which is flush with financial support is going to tend to its own wounded; Also, when we traveled to Nicaragua, it was not by means of any CIA-funded excursion. Together with our MISURASATA hosts, we chopped our own dugout canoes from the jungle, dragged the boats several miles overland to the ocean, and rode in the open boats the dozens of hours it took to reach Nicaragua by ocean route. Not surprisingly, there was not a CIA dime or agent to be found - just determined Indians trying to liberate their lands and their people. When I read the criticism of the $5 million appropriation for MISURASATA, I was reminded of Brooklyn's comments when he visited Denver earlier this year. When asked by a Sandinista supporter whether MISURASATA would accept financial assistance from the U.S, Brooklyn's response reflected the principle and courage of any true Indian leader. First, he responded his responsibility was to insure the survival of his people. The crude reality, he continued, was that his people were dying of hunger, disease, and from wounds sustained in the defense of their territories, and he was responsible for remedying those immediate conditions. He related the stories of his attempts to negotiate with the Sandinistas, and of the more than a dozen proposals submitted to the Sandinistas to resume negotiations in the past eighteen months - all to no avail. Then, he turned the question on its originator. Was the American Left willing to replace whatever funding MISURASATA refused to accept from the U.S? Was the American Left willing to support Indian aspirations in Miskitia $5 million worth? If they were, then Rivera said that he would gladly refuse the American aid. If they were not, then it was clear that the depth of support for Indian self-determination was a shallow as that of the Sandinistas. Perhaps the most galling aspect of the criticism leveled at MISURASATA for accepting U.S. assistance is the blatant double standard used by the critics. If the U.S. were to offer $5 million to the African National Congress for its struggle, would they be obliged to refuse it? Is the PLO obliged to refuse assistance from the Saudi ruling elite? Was Ho Chi Minh to be criticized for requesting U.S. assistance in pursuit of self-determination? Was Castro wrong to accept CIA assistance in furtherance of the Cuban revolution. Or perhaps it is only wrong when the "pre-capitalist" indigenous peoples of the world accept assistance in their effort to insure their survival. Another pernicious and arrogant element of the criticism leveled at both Notes and MISURASATA lies in the position that Native people are somehow oblivious to the level of oppression and destruction of which the United States is capable. Imagine that, non-Native critics educating Native people about the capacity of America to exercise oppression and duplicity. If one thing has been learned by indigenous peoples around the planet it is that our liberation does not emanate from the doctrines of Adam Smith or Karl Marx, not from Locke or Lenin and not from Reagan or Ortega. There is no question that the U.S, and the contras have their own designs for Miskitia, but anyone who has traveled to the region (and I do not mean on some government sanctioned visit to Puerto Cabezas or Bluefields for a few snapshots) understands that the Indian resistance is genuine, and that the determination of the Indian nations of Miskitia to be free of any foreign domination is undeniable. The Indian resistance on the Atlantic Coast began nearly seven years ago, before any U.S.-inspired contra activity, and it will continue until their is a recognition of the right of the Indian nations of the region to control their own territories and their own lives. Undeniably, the dilemmas in Nicaragua, and ultimately in the entire hemisphere, are difficult. However, the Sandinistas must realize that Indian objectives will not be subordinated unilaterally for the sake of the revolution. There is no settler government on the face of the earth which has the right to ask indigenous peoples to wait one day longer for the realization of their self-determination, and there is no settler state in the world which has a right to survival that is superior to that of the indigenous nations it must necessarily suppress. In this battle, perhaps people will believe what they want to believe, rationalize lies into truth. In that case, it is important for Indians to keep in mind a Misikito slogan that was carved onto a warriors rifle stock: "Only the Indian saves the Indian." In this struggle I am sticking with Notes and with MISURASATA. To that end, and to compensate for some of the loyal "allies" who are abandoning the only true voice of indigenous liberation in this country by canceling their subscriptions, I am sending a contribution for additional subscriptions. I hope that other Indians will do likewise in the understanding that, in the final analysis only Indians, and a very few intimate confederates, truly understand and respect the principles of Indian sovereignty and self-determination In spiritual and political unity. Glenn Morris, Co-director |
|
© 2004-2005
Colorado AIM Contact us at
denveraim@coloradoaim.org or
303-832-2544 |
