34 research outputs found
Governing Indigeneity Globally : Indigenous Peoples in the United Nations
VÀitöskirjani tarkastelee alkuperÀiskansoja kansainvÀlisessÀ politiikassa, erityisesti YhdistyneissÀ kansakunnissa (YK). AlkuperÀiskansa-asioiden pysyvÀn foorumin perustaminen ja alkuperÀiskansaoikeuksien kansainvÀlinen tunnustaminen ovat vahvistaneet alkuperÀiskansojen asemaa kansainvÀlisellÀ tasolla. NÀkyvin esimerkki tÀstÀ kehityksestÀ on YK:n AlkuperÀiskansojen oikeuksien julistus. NÀmÀ edistysaskeleet on otettu valtioihin pohjautuvassa jÀrjestelmÀssÀ. Valtiot, joista monet ovat kolonisoineet alkuperÀiskansoja ja aikaisemmin torjuneet heidÀn vaatimuksensa, ovat nyt tunnustamassa alkuperÀiskansojen oikeuksia. Tutkimuksen taustalla on kiinnostukseni tÀtÀ paradoksaalista tilannetta ja muutokseen johtaneita syitÀ kohtaan.
Tutkimuksessani vĂ€itĂ€n, ettĂ€ alkuperĂ€iskansojen lisÀÀntyneet oikeudet ja poliittinen osallistuminen eivĂ€t merkitse, ettĂ€ alkuperĂ€iskansoja kohtaan kĂ€ytettĂ€isiin vĂ€hemmĂ€n valtaa. Tarkastelen alkuperĂ€iskansojen toimijuutta kahdesta nĂ€kökulmasta. EnsimmĂ€isessĂ€ nĂ€en alkuperĂ€iskansat uusien normien edistĂ€jinĂ€ (norm socialisation). Identifioin erilaisia tapoja, joilla alkuperĂ€iskansat nostavat esiin heitĂ€ koskettavia kysymyksiĂ€, ehdottavat ratkaisuja ja pyrkivĂ€t edistĂ€mÀÀn uusien normien syntymistĂ€. Toinen lĂ€hestymistapa, joka pohjautuu kriittiseen foucaultâlaiseen vallan ja hallinnan tutkimukseen (governmentality) on työssĂ€ni keskeisessĂ€ osassa. LĂ€hestymistavan avulla keskustelen vallan kysymyksistĂ€ kolmessa eri temaattisessa yhteydessĂ€. EnsimmĂ€isessĂ€ tutkin alkuperĂ€iskansojen subjektiviteettia ja vastarintaa pysyvĂ€n foorumin mikrotason valtasuhteissa. Toisessa tarkastelen alkuperĂ€iskansaisuuden (indigeneity) ja ympĂ€ristön tiivistĂ€ yhteenkietoutumista ja sen merkityksiĂ€ kansainvĂ€lisessĂ€ politikassa. Kolmannessa tutkin tapaa jolla vallitseva ja yleisesti hyvĂ€ksytty alkuperĂ€iskansaoikeuspuhe, sen voimauttavista pyrkimyksistÀÀn huolimatta, pitÀÀ sisĂ€llÀÀn uusliberaaleja valtavaikutuksia.
Tutkimusmateriaali koostuu tekemistÀni havainnoista neljÀssÀ pysyvÀn foorumin vuosittaisessa kokouksessa, alkuperÀiskansojen, valtioiden ja YK:n jÀrjestöjen edustajien lausunnoista, pysyvÀn foorumin perustamiseen liittyvistÀ raporteista sekÀ alkuperÀiskansaoikeuksien erityisraportoijan raporteista. Tutkimuksen metodologinen lÀhtökohta on problematisointi. Se hyödyntÀÀ tekstianalyysia tutkimusmateriaalissa toistuvien ja tavanomaisina esitettyjen alkuperÀiskansaisuutta koskevien kÀsitysten tarkastelussa. NÀiden toistuvien kÀsitysten analyysissa olen kÀyttÀnyt kriittistÀ vallan ja hallinnan nÀkökulmaa. Analyysini paljastaa, miten usein epÀpoliittisina, vakiintuneina ja hyvÀksyttyinÀ nÀyttÀytyvÀt alkuperÀiskansakysymykset ovat kansainvÀlisesti poliittisia.
Tutkimukseni eroaa alkuperĂ€iskansoja ja politiikkaa tarkastelevista lĂ€hestymistavoista, jotka perinteisesti pitĂ€vĂ€t institutionaalisia, poliittisia ja oikeudellisia kehityksiĂ€ itsestÀÀn selvĂ€sti tavoiteltavan arvoisina ja âhyvinĂ€â. NĂ€mĂ€ lĂ€hestymistavat eivĂ€t kuitenkaan kykene tunnistamaan sitĂ€, miten valta ja hallinta ovat osa hyvĂ€ntahtoisilta vaikuttavia kehityksiĂ€ ja miten monin tavoin hierarkkiset valtasuhteet jatkavat olemassaoloaan. Samalla kun alkuperĂ€iskansojen oikeuksia, osallistumista ja alkuperĂ€iskansaisuuden oletettuja piirteitĂ€ vaalitaan YK:n piirissĂ€, valta ja hallinta ovat ottaneet hienovaraisempia muotoja. AlkuperĂ€iskansojen oikeuksien lisÀÀntynyt tunnustaminen ja poliittinen osallistuminen YK:ssa ovat osa uusliberaalia hallintaa.This dissertation studies indigenous peoples in international politics, particularly in the United Nations (UN). Indigenous peoples gained access to the organisation on a permanent basis with the establishment of the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues (PF). In addition, their rights are increasingly recognised by the UN member states, the most notable advance in this regard being the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. This progress has taken place in a state-based system, many of whose members have colonised indigenous peoples and at least previously been hostile to their demands. Indeed, it is this paradox, and my interest in how the change has come about that provided the impetus for the research project.
Despite these advances in indigenous participation and rights, I argue that there is no less power exercised over the peoples than previously. I approach the agency of indigenous peoples from two perspectives, that of norm socialisation and that of Foucault-inspired approaches to power and governmentality. The first perspective views indigenous peoples as norm entrepreneurs. It identifies frames through which the peoples draw attention to their concerns and suggest solutions; that is, the peoples promote the acceptance of new norms by states. The latter perspective informed three analyses. In the first, I investigated the ways in which the subjectification and resistance of indigenous peoples takes place in the small-scale power relations of the PF. The second consisted of a critical examination of the constant entanglement of indigeneity and the environment in international politics and its consequences for indigenous agency. The third examined the ways in which the prevailing and accepted discourse on indigenous rights has neoliberal power effects that go beyond the proclaimed emancipatory aims of the rights.
The research material comprises observations made in four PF annual sessions; statements by representatives of indigenous peoples, states and UN agencies; reports on the establishment of the PF; and reports of the Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. The study embraces the methodological guideline of problematisation: text analysis was applied to first identify recurrent and familiar perceptions of indigenous peoples and their agency; this then provided the basis for a critical examination of the power effects associated with the perceptions. The ultimate aim of the analysis was to recover the political in what often seems de-politicised, established and accepted in the context of indigenous peoples and international politics.
This research breaks from the more conventional approaches to indigenous peoples and politics that conceive of the international institutional, political and legal advances in indigenous issues as self-evidently desirable and âgoodâ. Such approaches fail to recognise the âdarkerâ side of the seemingly benign processes involved: they overlook the many ways in which more hierarchical power relations persist. There is no denying that the ways in which indigenous peoples and indigeneity are dealt with in the UN foster indigeneity and its alleged qualities and recognise the freedoms and rights of the peoples. However, as my critical study illustrates, the growing recognition of indigenous rights and the enhanced participation of indigenous peoples signals a change in the ways in which indigenous peoples are best managed internationally, a development geared to ensuring the efficient functioning of neoliberal governance. Indeed, rather than the peoples being governed any less in international politics today, governance at work has taken on more subtle forms.This dissertation studies indigenous peoples in international politics, particularly in the United Nations (UN). Indigenous peoples gained access to the organisation on a permanent basis with the establishment of the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues (PF). In addition, their rights are increasingly recognised by the UN member states, the most notable advance in this regard being the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. This progress has taken place in a state-based system, many of whose members have colonised indigenous peoples and at least previously been hostile to their demands. Indeed, it is this paradox, and my interest in how the change has come about that provided the impetus for the research project.
Despite these advances in indigenous participation and rights, I argue that there is no less power exercised over the peoples than previously. I approach the agency of indigenous peoples from two perspectives, that of norm socialisation and that of Foucault-inspired approaches to power and governmentality. The first perspective views indigenous peoples as norm entrepreneurs. It identifies frames through which the peoples draw attention to their concerns and suggest solutions; that is, the peoples promote the acceptance of new norms by states. The latter perspective informed three analyses. In the first, I investigated the ways in which the subjectification and resistance of indigenous peoples takes place in the small-scale power relations of the PF. The second consisted of a critical examination of the constant entanglement of indigeneity and the environment in international politics and its consequences for indigenous agency. The third examined the ways in which the prevailing and accepted discourse on
indigenous rights has neoliberal power effects that go beyond the proclaimed emancipatory aims of the rights.
The research material comprises observations made in four PF annual sessions; statements by representatives of indigenous peoples, states and UN agencies; reports on the establishment of the PF; and reports of the Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. The study embraces the methodological guideline of problematisation: text analysis was applied to first identify recurrent and familiar perceptions of indigenous peoples and their agency; this then provided the basis for a critical examination of the power effects associated with the perceptions. The ultimate aim of the analysis was to recover the political in what often seems de-politicised, established and accepted in the context of indigenous peoples and international politics.
This research breaks from the more conventional approaches to indigenous peoples and politics that conceive of the international institutional, political and legal advances in indigenous issues as self-evidently desirable and âgoodâ. Such approaches fail to recognise the âdarkerâ side of the seemingly benign processes involved: they overlook the many ways in which more hierarchical power relations persist. There is no denying that the ways in which indigenous peoples and indigeneity are dealt with in the UN foster indigeneity and its alleged qualities and recognise the freedoms and rights of the peoples. However, as my critical study illustrates, the growing recognition of indigenous rights and the enhanced participation of indigenous peoples signals a change in the ways in which indigenous peoples are best managed internationally, a development geared to ensuring the efficient functioning of neoliberal governance. Indeed, rather than the peoples being governed any less in international politics today,
governance at work has taken on more subtle forms.acceptedVersio
SinnikÀs kolonialismi: alkuperÀiskansaisuus ja kehityksen politiikka
Resilient colonialism: Indigeneity and the politics of development
Rapid and unpredictable global changes have given birth to a political ethos of resilience. In themidst of calls for preparedness, international politics has re-discovered the (allegedly) innate qualitiesof indigenous peoples that enable them to adapt to and accommodate change. The peoplesâexemplary resilience has been deemed empowering, not only for themselves, but for the planet asa whole. However, as we argue, the seemingly well-meaning and benign political celebration ofresilient indigeneity continues marginalization and othering, practices that are often considered tobelong to the colonial past. The article engages in a critical discussion on indigeneity, colonialismand resilience â topics that have yet to be brought into a dialogue with one another. With referenceto contemporary political initiatives of the United Nations and the Arctic Council, we illustrate theways in which the political focus on and desire for indigenous resilience continue the age-old expectationthat indigenous peoples will adapt, endure and persevere. Resilience enables colonialpractices to persist; it is yet another façade allowing those in power to continue to order time andto ignore the relevance of the past and current injuries indigenous peoples have endured. The violenceof resilience lies in its insistence that those whose only option so far has been to adapt continueto do so without any guarantees of better circumstances
'Being in Being': Contesting the Ontopolitics of Indigeneity Today
This article critiques the shift towards valorizing indigeneity in western thought and contemporary practice. This shift in approach to indigenous ways of knowing and being, historically derided under conditions of colonialism, is a reflection of the âontological turnâ in anthropology. Rather than indigenous peoples simply having an inferior or different understanding of the world to a modernist one, the âontological turnâ suggests their importance is that they constitute different worlds, and that they âworldâ in a performatively different way. The radical promise is that a different world already exists in potentia and that access to this alternative world is a question of ontology - of being differently: being in being rather than thinking, acting and âworldingâ as if we were transcendent or âpossessiveâ subjects. We argue that ontopolitical arguments for the superiority of indigenous ways of being should not be seen as radical or emancipatory resistances to modernist or colonial epistemological and ontological legacies but instead as a new form of neoliberal governmentality, cynically manipulating critical, postcolonial and ecological sensibilities for its own ends. Rather than âprovincialisingâ dominant western hegemonic practices, discourses of âindigeneityâ are functioning to extend them, instituting new forms of governing through calls for adaptation and resilience
Paradoxes of power:Indigenous peoples in the Permanent Forum
In the United Nations (UN) Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues (PF), indigenous political subjectivities take shape in the power relations that not only make indigenous peoples subjects but also subjugate them. This article discusses the process and the possibilities of resistance that open up for indigenous peoples within it. The approach taken acknowledges the limiting political environment of the UN for indigenous peoples, because it is a non-indigenous political system based on state sovereignty. Yet, it does not view the situation of those peoples in the PF as totally determined by the states and their dominant discourse. The theoretical framework of the article draws on the work of Michel Foucault and his conceptions on power, resistance, subjectification, technologies of domination and of the self. The power struggles in the PF, described through the complex of sovereignty, discipline and government, and the resistances within them engender paradoxical indigenous subjectivities: colonized/decolonized, victim/actor, traditional/modern, global/local. Indigenous peoples are able to engage both in resistance that is a reaction to statesâ exercise of power or the creative use of its tools and in indirect resistance that âstretchesâ the UN system and constitutes action on its own terms. </jats:p