Dispossession & Dispossessed
What we can learn from the similarities and differences between the quest for sovereignty of Indigenous people in Canada, and Palestinians in Israel.
I am a white, male, settler Canadian, as well as a diaspora Jew and former Israeli soldier, so I am sure that some may feel that I have no business weighing in on the issues of Indigenous or Palestinian sovereignty.
Nevertheless as I observe Indigenous protests dramatically paralyze essential transportation infrastructure across the country, in parallel with the spectacle of President Trump’s sham peace deal between Israelis and Palestinians, I cannot avoid the uncomfortable realization that the plights of these dispossessed peoples have a lot in common. My attempts to understand and empathize with the condition of Indigenous people in Canada has forced me to reconsider my entrenched attitudes toward Palestinian nationalism.
In both cases they were the native populations which inhabited their respective lands at the time of colonization. In the case of Canada, the colonial state pursued a policy which actively pushed Indigenous people off their land and into reservations, and attempted to eradicate Indigenous culture through forced assimilation and genocide. In the case of Israel, Zionist settlers audaciously built a National Home for Jews in Palestine which was obviously incompatible with the contemporary Arab inhabitants. Zionism denies that it is prejudiced against Arabs and in some theoretical sense this may be true, but practically the establishment of a Jewish state in an Arab country could not be anything but exclusive. This inconsistency between the theory and practice of Zionism is still unresolved.
Before rushing to draw parallels and conclusions between the two conflicts, it is worth noting that there are significant differences.
The Indigenous people are largely peaceful, have an extensive tradition of self-governance and nationhood, and have numerous legitimate and inspiring leaders. The outstanding achievements of Chief Billy Diamond and his supporters in their battle against the imperial resource development aspirations of Quebec and Canada in the 1970s serves as a model for present and future defence of Indigenous rights. The resultant treaty is a framework for cooperation and mutual benefit for both parties.
I do not mean to whitewash history. There have been issues with the implementation of the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement, however this treaty set a precedent for agreements between Indigenous nations and the colonial state with enforceable terms and conditions, and is vastly preferable to any prior treaty in the history of Canadian colonization.
Similar to the Wet’suwet’en, the territories of the Crees and Inuit were also unceded prior to the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement. Tireless Indigenous negotiators used the ‘white man’s law against the white man’ to force Canada and Quebec to recognize Indigenous rights and exact economic, social and environmental concessions.
Emboldened by past success and encouraged by the vacillating policy of the Federal Government, the Indigenous people have taken this process one step further and are asserting that their traditional law is unextinguished and takes primacy over colonial law. We live in interesting times.
In contrast, the Palestinians are divided and have been cynically exploited by the Arab nations as their ‘Shirt of Uthman’ since before the partition of Palestine. Furthermore, there was no Palestinian nation prior to the eviction of the Ottoman Empire and the establishment of the British Mandate in Palestine and no tradition of self-governance. For hundreds of years, what are now Palestinians were simply Arabs within the broad sweep of Dar-al-Islam which stretched from the straits of Gibraltar to the Bosphorus and ruled from Istanbul. Yes, there are Christian Arab Palestinians but they were quickly marginalized in the first few decades of Palestinian nationalism. The present Israeli-Palestinian conflict is largely divided along religious lines.
Geography plays a dominant role. Canada is 450 times larger than Israel with most of the population clustered in a few urban areas. If all Canadians lived between Toronto and Montreal, with the same proportion of Indigenous people, there would likely be more frequent and violent confrontations. In reaction, the state would probably implement more aggressive policies to enforce the peace, and the vicious cycle would repeat and worsen. This is the state of affairs between Israelis and Palestinians.
Demographics are also important. Indigenous people constitute approximately 5% of the population of Canada and the settler population continues to swell by roughly 300,000 new immigrants per year. In contrast, there are approximately 6.7 million Jews and 1.9 million Arabs in Israel proper (who are Israeli citizens), another 4.7 million Palestinians under Israeli rule in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, and a further 4.5 million Palestinians living in the global diaspora.
If Israel were to extend citizenship in whole or in part to this mass of humanity, the Jewish state would cease to exist and Jews would return to their perilous condition at the mercy of other nations. With the Arab-Israeli Wars, Holocaust, and two thousand years of bitter history at the forefront of Israeli consciousness, the idea of surrendering the hard won security afforded by the Jewish state is an anathema to most Jews and Israelis.
Now that we have noted some of the differences, let us return to what is common between the two conflicts:
Both the Canadian and Israeli states have now been in place for long enough such that their mere existence emerges as the raison d’être for continued existence. I am passionate about history and its cultural significance, but it is irrelevant that the Indigenous people have lived on Turtle Island since time immemorial, or that God supposedly gifted the Holy Land to the Jews in the Bible. The only thing that matters to the peace process is the here and now, and in which direction we wish to move next. All parties must be prepared to make compromises.
What Palestinians can learn from Indigenous people: No one can help create a Palestinian state until Palestinians help themselves. This starts with a renunciation of violence and choosing selfless and inspiring leaders who command a broad consensus of support. Billy Diamond’s father advised him to ‘use the white man’s law against the white man’; there are other ways to cause the oppressor pain besides hijacking, bombing, shooting and stabbing. Violence merely bolsters the arguments of the detractors on both sides who deny the legitimacy of the other. The Indigenous people have no choice but to recognize that Canada is a fact; the other 35 million Canadians are not going anywhere. Similarly, Palestinians must reconcile themselves to the fact of Israel’s existence and legitimacy, and steal the thunder from the Israeli nationalists who point to the continued rejection of the Jewish state as a reason to delay or abdicate negotiating with the Palestinians.
What Israelis can learn from Canadians: Canada cannot continue to be a multicultural democratic state which respects the rule of law and simultaneously use violence to deny Indigenous people their rights and heritage. Similarly, Israel cannot pursue two mutually conflicting goals indefinitely. The Jewish state cannot continue to be a secular democratic country and deny the Palestinians citizenship or sovereignty; it must be one or the other. If Israel closes the door on peace talks by settling land ultimately reserved for a Palestinian state, the Palestinians will never cease in their quest to breach the walls around them. It is difficult to foresee a just and secure framework for Palestinians and Israelis to live in harmony but one thing is clear: Palestinian sovereignty is the ultimate and necessary objective. Israelis who remember their recent history should feel sympathy for this burning desire.
What Indigenous people can learn from Israelis: Israel has unique security and identity concerns which must be addressed as a necessary condition to achieve a final land settlement. Canada also has unique concerns in regards to the continuity of Confederation, legal jurisdiction, and the unimpeded flow of goods and people across the country. Additionally, Israelis are insulted by the continual threats to its legitimacy, and perceive these attacks as an attempt to isolate and endanger the Jewish state. Canada is not in immediate danger from Indigenous people but its concerns are just as legitimate. Indigenous leaders need to understand these concerns and cooperate with their counterparts in the Canadian government to develop inventive solutions which are compatible with Indigenous sovereignty.
What Canadians can learn from Palestinians: The conflict we have with Indigenous people is about land and self-determination. We cannot earnestly profess our commitment to Truth and Reconciliation without being prepared to cede territory and recognize Indigenous sovereignty within respected boundaries. What this means for the future integrity of the Canadian Confederation is agonizing and unprecedented. However, Indigenous people have almost all followed the model of the Crees and Inuit and desire to cooperate with Canada on a nation-to-nation level to the mutual benefit of both parties. Like the Palestinians, Indigenous people have long been forced to accommodate an alien government which imposed on them a humiliating legal and political status. The Indigenous demands for proper healthcare, equal access to economic opportunities and to live without fear of intimidation by militarized police are not unreasonable. It is an intolerable disgrace that there are still boil water advisories in effect in many Indigenous communities across the country.
Where do we go from here? Some would disagree, but things are changing. When the Mohawk blockaded the Mercier Bridge during the Oka Crisis three decades ago, the government sent in the army. Now we are having a national discussion about the unextinguished primacy of Indigenous law. While successive governments have dragged their feet, the judiciary is gradually chipping away at the power structures which have kept Indigenous peoples under the yoke of the Canadian state. If we have indeed reached a deadlock, bold action is required to unstick the process and it is the duty of the powerful party to take the lead.
In the 20th century the Dominion of Canada quietly led the British Commonwealth down the path of autonomy and later independence from Britain. I hope that we can find the courage and compassion to take up the mantle of leadership once more, reconcile with our history as oppressors and honour our commitments to the oppressed. I hope that Indigenous leaders will restrain the more hot-tempered voices in their communities and allow for peaceful and rational dialogue to prevail.
If we succeed together, Canadians and Indigenous people can serve as a model for peaceful conflict resolution and share our wisdom and experience to help resolve seemingly intractable conflicts between others, including Israelis and Palestinians. The goal is noble, the path is tortuous. We must all be prepared to make compromises.
Samuel Buckstein
