The US "Rethinks" The UN Declaration On Indigenous Rights, Maybe

On Tuesday, 16 December 2010, the US reversed the Bush administration's strong opposition to the United Nations Declaration on Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), adopted by 143 countries in 2007 after nearly 30 years of hard-fought negotiations and activism. Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the United States were the only four countries that voted against the Declaration in 2007. They worried that its language would contradict current law and treaty interpretations, especially those still supported legally via the Christian Doctrine of Discovery that stemmed from a 1452 Papal Bull. Activism in support of these countries changing course continued, however, and in 2009 Australia changed its position, followed by New Zealand in April 2010 and Canada in November 2010. On December 16, 2010, President Obama announced the decision at the second annual White House Tribal Nations Conference, which was held not at the White House, but at the Department of the Interior nearby. In his speech he stated:

And as you know, in April, we announced that we were reviewing our position on the U.N. Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. And today I can announce that the United States is lending its support to this declaration. The aspirations it affirms - including the respect for the institutions and rich cultures of Native peoples - are ones we must always seek to fulfill. And we're releasing a more detailed statement about US support for the declaration and our ongoing work in Indian Country. But I want to be clear: What matters far more than words - what matters far more than any resolution or declaration - are actions to match those words. And that's what this conference is about. That's what this conference is about. That's the standard I expect my administration to be held to.

In spite of the president's assertion that action matters more than words, the reference to "releasing a more detailed statement" is the telling phrase, revealing the US position is going to be yet another broken promise to "Indians." State Department spokesman, PJ Crowley, made a similar comment after the president's speech: "Obviously, as with any international declaration, we have certain reservations that we will voice reflecting our own domestic and constitutional interests." The other three countries voiced similar disclaimers and passed legislation after their endorsements to assure there would be no problems with the declaration all countries are careful to call, "non-binding."

GO HERE to read more.