Assistant Secretary of Indian Affairs Kevin Washburn characterized his job as a hard one when he addressed an audience in Oklahoma last week. “I’ve basically taken on almost all of the United States’ problems over the last 200 years,” he said.

He didn’t just refer to the “Indian Problem,” did he? The problem the United States has always had of “what to do” with the Indians?

The problem Andrew Jackson sought to put out of sight and out of mind by signing the Indian Removal Act in 1830?

The same problem Chester Arthur, the 21st president of the United States, brought before Congress in 1881?

“We have to deal with the appalling fact that though thousands of lives have been sacrificed and hundreds of millions of dollars expended in the attempt to solve the Indian problem, it has until within the past few years seemed scarcely nearer a solution than it was half a century ago,” Arthur said during his first address to Congress that year.

Arthur suggested creating Indian allotments, because he believed the allotment system would dissolve the “tribal bond, which is so prominent a feature of savage life.” He believed Indians would turn to agriculture and be assimilated into White society through education provided by schools like the one in Carlisle, Pennsylvania.

I’m fairly certain President Arthur would be appalled the “Indian Problem” still exists – that tribal bonds are still strong and tribal governments still exist - nearly 183 years after Jackson signed the Removal Act.

He and Jackson are probably rolling in their graves.

Whether they are rolling in disgust or laughter, I do not know. Perhaps they don’t know which way to roll any more than I do.

The “Indian Problem” isn’t theirs anymore. It’s ours.

The BIA is handing the problem of managing our governments firmly back to us – for the first time in, what was that number? 200 years? So, after 200 years of having a supreme authority to help us settle our disputes and assist us in managing our affairs, we are being cut off.

Several Oklahoma tribal nations are torn apart by internal conflict. We have a tribe being led by two opposing governments, conducting two tribal courts and passing legislation. Another tribe’s election board has been locked out of its office since a 2011 recall election dispute. We have tribal citizens who don’t truly know who is legally in charge of their tribes, where the tribal money goes or how it is spent.

Tribal leaders and citizens alike have appealed to the Bureau of Indian Affairs for help because they have nowhere else to go.

They have been told to help themselves. After all, that is the point of self-government. The BIA says it will become involved only when absolutely necessary.

The federal government has been more than happy to interfere in tribal affairs over the course of history when there was something to gain from it – land, gold, oil and minerals. In my own tribal history, there are several federally appointed “Chiefs for a day” who signed documents and performed other duties as required by the feds.

Yet today, when tribal funds are frozen; the legality of tribal court cases are questionable; elders, children and the sick aren’t getting the help they need; and tribal employees aren’t getting paid - it’s hands off for the BIA. They respect our tribal sovereignty, they say, and turn away when asked for help.

Isn’t it absolutely necessary to help when people are suffering? I watch the news. The U.S. government rushes into countries all over the world to help when there is civil unrest. When governments are collapsing and people need food and medical aid, they rush in with their NATO allies to save the day.

What about us? We who live within your own boundaries?

Washburn said he didn’t take his job because he wanted to be a referee. Watching two tribes fight was like watching his kids fight. He doesn’t want to take sides. He wants them to work it out on their own.

And so the Great White Father makes the decree to his sovereign dependents: work it out on your own. Paternalism is over.

I can’t really blame Washburn. Who would want to referee in Indian Country?

It’s a job that would involve unpopular and often controversial decisions. It’s a lose/lose proposition. Intervention will be interpreted as uprooting tribal sovereignty and/or playing favorites while non-intervention shows a lack of concern and empathy for the welfare of tribal citizens who have nowhere else to turn.

What to do? Take on that job or wash your hands of it? The hands have been washed.

The Indian Problem is firmly ours to manage. To continue to survive and prosper in this world, we must work out a solution to intra-tribal and inter-tribal disputes. And it must be a solution we are all bound to abide - an intra-tribal NATO of sorts, or perhaps Elders Peace Council.  Otherwise, many will fall, one by one, as the feds keep a grip on the purse strings while turning a deaf ear to pleas for help.

Washburn said if tribes have the tools, they’ll “generally do better than the federal government.”

Who has the tools and the strength to wield them? I think that’s you, Mr. Washburn. We still need a little help from the BIA and some tools to work with.  Not forever, mind you, but just a little longer to get prepared. We have some catching up to do.

 

Lisa Snell is the Owner/Publisher of the Native Times. She is a 1993 graduate of the University of Tulsa’s School of Communication and is a citizen of the Cherokee Nation. She has owned the Native Times since Sept. 1, 2008.