Lakota Sioux withdraw from Treaties with the US
They want an independent nation. More on the property situation:
The move to form an independent nation will focus on property rights in a five-state area where the treaties in question were drawn up. The states include South Dakota, North Dakota, Nebraska, Wyoming and Montana – areas that the group say have been illegally homesteaded for years despite knowledge of Lakota as the historic owners. If the U.S. government does not immediately enter into diplomatic negotiations, the group said in a news release, liens will be filed on real-estate transactions across the region -- an action it says could cloud title issues over thousands of square miles of land and property.Bolivia and Venezuela are likely to be quick to recognize the new government.
Should be interesting to see if this is just one guy holding a press conference or if there is a core group ready to make a run at this.
It will be fascinating to watch.
Posted by: Flagg | December 20, 2007 at 02:52 PM
Also - from the perspective of small globalguerrilla groups sharing tactics in the bazaar - wasn't the whole "lien filing" tactic first used by various militia and supremacist groups as a tactic against local law enforcement and government officials?
Posted by: Flagg | December 20, 2007 at 02:55 PM
So if the peace is over then are they in a state of war with the US? They seem to have considered the economic and diplomatic aspects, but not the military. I mean, do you want to start an insurgency just as we’re starting to get this COIN thing down?
On the flip side, can the Pentagon afford to pull the 1st Cav out of the Iraq rotation to deal with this new threat? Are they going to have to increase the number of Cat V recruits to fill all the new 19D slots?
What a mess . . .
Posted by: Michael Tanji | December 20, 2007 at 09:06 PM
BTW, I'm heading into the Lakota nation in a few days. I'll have a report when I get back, assuming I can run the blockade.
Posted by: Michael Tanji | December 20, 2007 at 09:08 PM
Will the theme music for this secession be "Johnny Kick a Hole in the Sky" by the Red Hot Chili Peppers or "Freedom" by Rage Against the Machine?
Posted by: Boltonian | December 21, 2007 at 05:50 PM
More like "Hey Man, Nice Shot" by Filter or "Because I Got High" by Afroman...
Posted by: Flagg | December 21, 2007 at 10:52 PM
(Cross-posted on John's and Soob's blogs)
This is the work of Russel Means, formerly of the AIM (American Indian Movement) terrorist organization, now a Democratic Party activist whose main occupation appears to be causing problems for the Democratic Party. (He also had a speaking role in Disney's Pocahontas).
The Great Sioux Nation was created by the Fort Laramie treaty, brining together several tribes in one continguous geographic area. As a treaty, the boundaries of the Great Sioux Nation were the law of the land.... until Congress declared the land open to settlement.
The tribal governments (which still exist, hold regular elections, etc) are not involved in this, as from their perspective the excersize is bizarre. The tribes never recognized the absorption of Great Sioux Nation lands (and indeed refuse to take the accept the monetary compensation Washington has provided), so there is nothing for them to declare. Further, withdrawing of the Fort Laramie Treaty would /dissolve/ the Great Sioux Nation, as it had no legal existence apart from the tribes before then.
Incidentally, while AIM was most visibly targeting US and state governments, their actual goal was the overthrow of the tribal reservation governments... each of the Sioux tribes tend to be governed by one or two extended families, and ideology rarely plays a role in election, except with regards to abortion (while typically voting for Democratic candidates, Lakota tend to be pro-life and culturally conservative).
Posted by: dan tdaxp | December 22, 2007 at 12:04 PM