Circumpolar Indigeneity in Canada, Russia, and the United States (Alaska): Do Differences Result in Representational Challenges for the Arctic Council?

Evgeniia Sidorova

doi:10.14430/arctic67955

Abstract

This article investigates differences in circumpolar indigeneities in three major Arctic nations: Russia, Canada, and the United States (Alaska). Russia has different ways of recognizing indigeneity in law, and that definition of indigeneity excludes larger Indigenous groups of the Far North (Sakha, Komi), rather than seeing them as ethnic (titular) minorities. This study reveals that: 1) not all Indigenous peoples are represented in the Arctic Council; 2) there are historical explanations for this underrepresentation; 3) the Arctic Council should include more Indigenous groups as Permanent Participants. The equal representation of Indigenous organizations as Permanent Participants in the Arctic Council is important because all Indigenous groups in the Arctic should be heard.

Highlights

AUTONOMY OF NORTHERN INDIGENOUS GROUPSIndigenous peoples are unique because they are “exceptional,” historically “other,” and distinguishable
This article investigates differences in circumpolar indigeneities in three major Arctic nations: Russia, Canada, and the United States (Alaska)
According to some authors (Slezkine, 1994; Pika, 1999; Øverland, 2009), the Russian definition of indigeneity focuses on the size of the population, not on the fact of conquest

Summary

AUTONOMY OF NORTHERN INDIGENOUS GROUPS

Indigenous peoples are unique because they are “exceptional,” historically “other,” and distinguishable. From 1867 to 1912, before Alaska gained territorial status with an elected legislature, Congress did not consider Alaska Natives in the same way as Native Americans They could not claim Aboriginal title or the same self-governing status as Indigenous people in the Lower 48. Unlike in Canada and the United States, the initiative of granting autonomy to Indigenous groups began with the Soviet government, which was guided by Marxist ideas of self-determination. Because of ideological and historical differences between the United States, Canada, and Russia, legal and political identities of Indigenous peoples, as well as their rights to autonomy, developed in distinct ways. These differences show that histories of colonialism affected legal recognition of Indigenous peoples by creating separate notions of indigeneity

THE ARCTIC COUNCIL AND PERMANENT PARTICIPANTS

Recognition of Indigenous title and the right to autonomy