|
Land, Water and
Indigenous People
Awala Longkumer1
Introduction
The capacity of indigenous people to develop as individuals and as a people
is based on a social order that is determined by the people themselves. This
social order, which defines the relationship between themselves and the land
and nature as well as between one individual and another, finds expression
in their customs and in unwritten laws as these are practiced in a given
territorial base. If and when this social order is destroyed, their identity
and continuity as a people is threatened, and crisis ensues.
For indigenous people in Asia, the current situation is one of persistent
crisis as they continue to fall victim to colonial, neo-colonial and
national vehicles of oppression. Hence, their struggles are for
self-determination. These struggles are to regain and to re-establish their
sovereignty over a territorial base and to maintain a social order that they
themselves determine.
Of the estimated 200 million indigenous people in the world, about 150
million are found in Asia, including 54 million in India, more than 7
million in the Philippines, and 21.1 million in Burma.
Although collectively referred to as Aborigines, tribals, natives, hill
peoples, or minority peoples, the indigenous people of Asia share much
in common. They are descendants of the original inhabitants whose territory
had been overcome by conquest. They have their own languages, religions,
customs and worldviews, and they are determined to transmit these to their
next generations. They do not have any centralized political institution,
but they organize themselves instead as a community, with their own methods
of arriving at decisions, e.g. by consensus.
Issues of Discrimination, Development and Invasion
That indigenous people are discriminated in their own countries can also be
seen in the manner by which they are identified - e.g. as Adivasi (original
inhabitants), Igorot (people of the mountains), and Orang Asli (original
people). These are used by non-indigenous people, often with derogatory
connotations - e.g. uncivilized, barbarians or pagans.
The indigenous people of Asia are also often the victims of national
development projects such as dams, roads, mining and agricultural schemes.
The massive Narmada Valley project in India, for example, which involves the
construction of at least 30 major dams, and which will flood four thousand
hectares of cultivated and forest lands when completed, will displace more
than a million people, most of whom are Adivasis (Tribal/Indigenous people).
Due to incessant catchment and release of over 2,70,000 cusecs of dam water
from Tawa dam the water levels are further rising engulfing more fields and
houses of Adivasis and farmers. Between 20 and 22 August 2002 large scale
submergence was caused when the water levels at the dam site touched 103m.
The submergence is a result of the illegal, unjust increase in the height of
the dam, first from 85 to 90 meters and then to 95 meters violating the
provisions of Narmada Water Dispute Tribunal Award regarding displacement
and resettlement. About 8000 families in 70 villages in Madhya Pradesh will
be affected adversely. In Maharastra the recently finished Task Force study
has stated that at least 1000 families have yet to be rehabilitated and the
number may increase.
Indigenous people often become victims whenever transnational companies are
active participants in the so-called 'development' of a country. Whether it
is a mining enterprise, an agribusiness venture or an industrial project, it
is bound to affect indigenous people seriously: through displacement from
their lands, and then as exploited labour for these Transnational
Corporations (TNCs).
Under the guise of national security and national integration, indigenous
people are also often forced to conform to the notion of national race or
identity. Assimilation into the mainstream is the policy for the Adivasis/Tribal
people of India.
Indigenous people in Asia face the onslaught of invasion and occupation by
outsiders. In North East India, for example, the Tripura people continue to
rebel against the occupation of their lands by the Bengalis, causing
communal conflict, leading to communal hatred and disharmony. Meanwhile,
reports of violations of human rights, torture, and rape continue to come
from the indigenous peoples' areas.
Land is Life
By tacit understanding between groups of neighbouring indigenous people,
each tribe or community has made claim to well demarcated tracts of
customary or ancestral lands - sometimes arid lands or mountain ranges; at
other times plain and coastal area; but most often forested lowlands and
highlands. Whatever the nature of their ancestral lands and water,
indigenous people share a worldview which embodies a custodial concept of
land and natural resources. Therefore, in any discussion on the position of
indigenous people, the question of land and water is bound to feature
foremost - and for good reasons too.
For indigenous people, land is life and blood. It is a living entity with a
sacredness of its own. It assures their continued survival; it provides
food, clothing, medicines, fuel and all materials necessary for their
existence as well as protection from their enemies. Land is also the
schoolhouse of their children and the resting place of their ancestors.
It is the land, more than anything else, that gives life and meaning to
their whole being for in it their history and identity are contained. It is
also the land that ensures their viability as independent people, and
provides for their social and cultural development. Indigenous people,
therefore, do not only have material dependence on the land but they also
share a spiritual relationship with it. However, with the rise of capitalist
economy, land and water have been turned into commodities and are treated as
objects of speculation and reduced to mere sources of financial profit.
Water is Life
Water is the most abundant resource that God has given to humankind and
other life forms but now it has become an expensive commodity. Bodies of
water, big and small, sustain life. Human beings categorize water based on
its usage in this order of priority:
1. Drinking Water - potable water is vital to maintain various
systems in the body.
2. Livelihood Water - used in irrigation and other sources of
livelihood (e.g. aqua-culture and fishing).
3. Industrial Water - used in cooling systems of power, smelter plants
and other industrial uses.
4. Leisure Water - used in golf courses, swimming pools, and other
water sports.
Lack of access to water and especially clean drinking water may be the
result of policies prioritizing certain categories of water. In India,
national policy on water stipulates that drinking water should be given
priority over other water uses. However, in actual fact, industries are
given priority because of profit and tax derived from them. Thus, drinking
water is not readily available to people.
Water pollution due to urbanization and industrial wastes (chemicals, ashes,
thermal pollution) has led to the destruction of fish resources, decreasing
crop yields, and declining livelihood resources. Decreasing livelihood water
has resulted from the demand for non-priority uses and the destruction of
coastal, marine, and fresh water eco-systems. Decrease in livelihood water
leads to increase in poverty level, domestic violence, criminality and
health hazards, and decrease in basic services.
Impact of Globalization
Imperialism can be divided into colonial/neo-colonial development phase and
the corporate globalization phase. Globalization is characterized by
dominant financial global markets and trade, which started in the 1970s but
became most visible in the 1990s. Globalization in various forms -
political, economic, socio-cultural - is inter-related and has adversely
affected the people's struggle for life.
With globalization, the government's role in providing public services has
greatly diminished resulting from the policies on privatization,
deregulation and liberalization. Diminished power of state translates into
increased power of corporations and further commodification of water and
land resources. Globalization excludes the poor and eventually widens the
gap between them and the rich.
Globalization incites feminization of poverty. It is the women who are left
to deal with falling standards in public services. Women are expected to
provide home-based care for the sick who cannot afford hospital care. Women
have to walk long distances in search of clean drinking water.
With globalization, the government's increased external debt translates to
further enslavement. Money borrowed to finance industries and large dams
mean further impoverishment of the nation as well as displacement of many
people. For example, the Indian government must have incurred huge debts to
pursue such mega projects as the Ennore and North Chennai Thermal Stations
in Tamil Nadu. Fisher folk who do not benefit from these projects will
eventually lose their livelihood because of thermal pollution.
Economic globalization induces distress migration and forced dislocation,
and denies social and political space for people to take responsibility for
their own lives. Thus, human rights are infringed upon in the process of
economic globalization.
Globalization forces people to make alliances, linkages, and networks on a
wider scale for stronger struggle. However, the marginalized sectors have
little access to information technology in order to form their own alliances
and network. This implies that the people working with the marginalized have
to evolve concrete, viable, constructive, contextual strategies.
To fight against globalization, people of various faiths need to:
Affirm communitarian values and reject individualism;
Affirm basic needs for all and reject consumerism;
Affirm sense of belonging and stewardship, and reject alienation;
Affirm inclusion and reject exclusion;
Affirm equality and democracy, and reject inequality and exploitation;
Affirm conflict resolution and reject militarism/harassment;
Affirm harmony with creation and reject ecological injustice;
Affirm sacredness of creation and reject commodification of creation;
Affirm ubuntu (humanness in community) and reject profits before people;
Affirm need and reject greed;
Affirm active participation and resistance, and reject despair and
hopelessness;
Affirm dignity and self-responsibility, and reject dependence; and
Affirm life and reject death.
Basis of Indigenous Culture
The environment in which the indigenous people live is determined, to a
large extent, by the form and character of their material culture. Their
dress, architecture, methods of hunting and fishing, choice of crops,
methods of cultivation, among other things, are all interlinked with the
particular endowments of their material base, their 'mother earth'. The
environment provides the base to which indigenous people apply their
ingenuity and energy to adapt and co-exist with the environment.
The indigenous people's relationship to their land is not restricted to the
material aspects of their culture. Neither is it a purely economic relation.
Their high regard for the land is a consequence of their realization that
their material existence depends on the nurture of and respect for the land.
This has evolved into an ethos which is common among all indigenous peoples.
This ethos, character or disposition of the indigenous community represents
a quality of being and living which is far more integrated, more humane and
more egalitarian than the ethos of many modern civilizations. It is an ethos
that has evolved over a long period of time, amassing the experiences of
generations upon generations of indigenous peoples. The mindset is to enjoy
the fruits of the present without risking the next generation, to ensure
continual enjoyment of scarce resources in a situation of relative plenty.
At the core of this ethos is the concept of harmony - harmony with nature
and harmony within the community.
Logic of Harmony
The logic of this concept of harmony is based on two principles. The first
is the non-aggression pact between community and nature. It is an unspoken
though carefully observed law that the community would not exploit the
latter, that the community would not abuse the latter's generosity, and that
the community would not exclude the latter in its relationships.
The second principle is the rejection of the maxim 'having is a mode of
being'. It is a non-verbalized but no less internalized value that the
quantity of material possessions would not determine the quality of human
life. Wealth and power are not interconvertible and are not to be the basis
of social relations, just as status is for service and not to be subverted
to amassing possessions. Human dignity is respected and not subjected to
materialistic considerations.
This logic of harmony with the environment and within the community has
influenced the lives of indigenous peoples, both then and now. For
indigenous peoples, there is value in not taking more than what is required
from the land. This is similar to the biblical injunction, "Gather a day's
portion everyday" (Exodus 16:4), which is about being satisfied with what
one has for one's need. There is also the value of sustained utilization
which has found expression in the social institutions that have evolved.
Similarly, mutualism and cooperation became the determining values linking
all life, while individualism and competition were avoided.
Out of this logic of harmony, the ethos of the indigenous people came to be
internalized, permeating and defining all aspects of their society,
jurisprudence, education, politics, religion, rituals, customs, technology,
recreation, language, economics, medicine and philosophy.
Viability of Indigenous Social Systems
Can the institutions of indigenous society provide a viable alternative to
the current political, economic, social, cultural, educational, religious
and intellectual systems?
It should be stressed that there are no indigenous social systems dominating
modern societies today, not because of the inadequacies of these systems,
but because the indigenous social systems were never given the opportunity
to develop to this stage. External forces came to dominate and, in some
cases, annihilate indigenous people and their societies. Indigenous social
systems have not been tested in the context of today's society. We have to
try this by ourselves.
Many problems in today's society are caused by the application of the logic
of the dominant capitalist worldview. It is therefore very unlikely that
indigenous social systems have been allowed to develop and define the woes
of today's society - misdirected production, dehumanization, crime,
ecological devastation, financial scandals, urban over-crowding,
homelessness, corruption and others - which are counter to the worldview of
the indigenous peoples.
Indigenous people have highly developed political, legal and social systems
which have worked successfully for centuries. That is, until the advent of
colonialism and capitalism. This suggests that indigenous social systems are
not static; neither are they closed to outside influence and values. The
survival of indigenous people is due to their capacity to borrow and adapt
what is useful rather than a zealous commitment to tradition for its own
sake.
Thus, indigenous social systems can be a viable alternative to the present
day system. There have been several attempts to work towards this ideal: as
in the case of the Naga National Council (an expanded tribal council based
on the indigenous socio-political system). The viability of indigenous
social systems as an alternative to current systems, therefore, is not a
question. It only remains to be seen how indigenous social systems can be
applied and developed in today's society.
Impact of Dominant Society on Indigenous Social Systems
Indigenous people and their lands were left alone for a long time until
changing world conditions, particularly in the western hemisphere, caused
them and their lands to be viewed differently. Previously lands of the
indigenous people were considered marginal or of no economic or political
value. With the demand for minerals and other natural resources, resulting
from rapid industrialization of developed countries and the escalation of
the arms race, indigenous lands became the prime targets for the search of
raw materials. In India, for example, 80% of minerals and 72% of forest and
other natural resources are found in the lands of the tribal people.
As the best lands came to be in short supply, the marginal lands - whereto
indigenous peoples were forced by earlier conquering peoples - were now
coveted by dominant non-indigenous population, for use by large agribusiness
corporations, foreign military bases, or construction of massive
hydro-electric dams or recreation facilities.
Very often the invading or colonizing forces were not just interested in the
lands of the indigenous peoples. They were also interested in the indigenous
people as individuals -for their cheap labour. Therefore, indigenous peoples
also came to be regarded as raw material to be used and exploited for
maximum gain. They were often used as collectors of forest products, as
cheap or slave-labour in plantations and in mining industries, or as forced
or bonded-labour in the construction industry. This was the case in India
when the stadium and related complexes for the Asian Games 1982 were being
built.
Modes of Domination
Just as there were varying reasons why indigenous people and their lands
were needed by non-indigenous people, so too were there various means by
which their dispossession and subjugation were achieved. The process of
colonization undoubtedly stands out as the most important factor responsible
for the past and current misery of indigenous people. Believing rather
presumptuously that the lands of indigenous people were uninhabited or, if
found to be peopled, that indigenous people were of an inferior breed in
need of religion and civilization, early colonizers - be they British,
American, Spanish, Dutch, Portuguese or Japanese - invaded and re-organized,
sometimes decimated, whole indigenous societies. This they did for either
settlement of their own peoples (as it was in the case of the colonization
of Australia) or, as was frequently the case, for the cause of "Gold, Glory
and God".
After World War II, when colonial governments began retreating from their
territories and granting 'independence' to their colonies, a new form of
domination over indigenous people ensured: neo-colonialism which is also
referred to as 'internal colonialism' or 'national oppression'. All refer to
the phenomenon of continued imperialism by the new national governments.
Ignoring the historically autonomous and sovereign presence of indigenous
people and their claims to traditional lands, colonialists tended to
consider indigenous people as part of the colonized majority and so created
new nation-states where indigenous rights were largely overlooked. The
history of indigenous people therefore is one of invasion, colonization and
domination. Indigenous people were victims before and they continue to be
victims today.
Whether through colonization by foreigners or by the dominant national
group, indigenous people have experienced one remarkably common impact: loss
of their ancestral lands. Working in league with ruling elite, who now
controls these 'state lands', transnational corporations are able to obtain
title to large tracts of land for agribusiness purposes or for extraction of
timber and mineral resources found therein. The creation of national parks
and forest reserves has also effectively denied indigenous people access to
the use of their lands.
In both colonial and post-colonial times, indigenous people lost their
rights to and ownership of their ancestral lands. This loss of ancestral
lands has the greatest impact on the future of indigenous people. The
pretext of a Supreme Court Order in India, for example, states that people
living in the forest are called encroachers who should be evicted.
We might have conquered the whole world but the destruction made to the
indigenous peoples and the environment remains a blemish on humanity.
Some Questions
The indigenous people's understanding of land and nature is at variance with
the Christian understanding of creation. Regard for land and natural
resources as commodity is in direct conflict with the indigenous people's
understanding. The Christian position has been that of supporting
commodification of land and other natural resources. How do we deal with
this contradiction?
Indigenous people understand that the Creator's will is for them to be in
harmony with nature and with other communities. The capitalist conception is
that humans are given control of nature and whatever is in it. This has also
been the theological contention of so-called Christian leaders. How do we
reconcile these two opposing concepts?
Indigenous people accept diversity as a fact of creation. Globalization
seeks to make things uniform; there is no place for plurality! How do we
respond to this phenomenon of political, social economic, cultural
homogenization?
How do we theologically respond to the use of State-sponsored violence to
contain so-called "militancy" which is but an expression of determination
and self-identity of the indigenous people? Many times we condemn violence
and with it we condemn the indigenous people. And yet, how do we make a
theological critique of state-violence manifesting itself as ethnocide?
References
DIALOG ASIA. Hong Kong: Christian Conference of Asia-Urban Rural Mission,
1986.
Identity and Justice. Christian Conference of Asia-Urban Rural Mission,
1977.
Indigenous Peoples of Asia: Towards Self Determination. A.I.P.P.
Publication, 1988.
Indigenous Peoples of Asia: Many Peoples � One Struggle. A.I.P.P.
Publication, 1996.
Luttenberg, Gerard. ed. "Final Report Indigenous Peoples' Millennium
Conference, 7-11 May 2001, Panama." Netherlands Centre for Indigenous
Peoples, 2002.
National Council of Churches Review, Vol.CXXII, No.1 (January-February,
2002) pp.109-138. "Conference Statement, The International Conference on
Faith and Ecology 2001"; "Land Water and Air: People's Struggle for Life in
a Globalising Economy," December 10-15, 2001.
National Council of Churches in India Newsletter. Vol.12 (May-September,
2000), No.3, pp. 23-28; Statement on "The land does not belong to us - We
belong to the land", National Council of Churches in India's Consultation on
Displacement.
Sukumar, M.K., et. al. "Waters Rising Dangerously, Satyagrahis Facing
Submergence Dams in the Narmada Valley are a crying shame!" in People's
Reporter, A Forum of Current Affairs 15:17 (September 10-25, 2002), pp. 1 &
4.
Suna, Dinesh. "Report of NCCI Youth Empowerment Training Programme Exposure
to Narmada Dam, Gujarat", February 22-27, 2002.
Vinding, Diane. ed. The Indigenous World 2001-2002. International Working
Group of Indigenous Affairs 2002. Copenhagen, Denmark: ESK-Skolens Trykkeri
Aps, pp. 341-6.
|
