The recent rail blockages across Canada have polarized the dialogue around Indigenous land rights in B.C. Because many who are engaging in climate activism are taking up a voice to support the five protesting hereditary chiefs of the Wet’suwet’en Nation, the line between the two issues has been muddied.
The Wet’suwet’en and anti-pipeline protests are connected: much of the reason for the hereditary chiefs protesting the Coastal GasLink pipeline is environmental concerns for the unceded territory.
But it has progressed beyond that. The protests have become a symbol of Indigenous people fighting for their rights within B.C.
Media coverage can make things feel like a for-or-against argument, but it is important to remember that in any debate there are multiple perspectives informed by many types of knowledge.
You don’t need to support the Wet’suwet’en protestors to be against the creation of pipelines, and you don’t need to be anti-pipeline to support the Wet’suwet’en land claims.
You don’t need to support the Wet’suwet’en hereditary chiefs’ protest in order to support Indigenous rights and denounce the grave injustices to Indigenous groups across Canada, and you can be for the protests and be irritated by the transit blockages.
Constructive dialogue breaks down in polarization. Few conflicts can be broken down to only one issue, yet often people are pushed to choose sides.
Wet’suwet’en hereditary subchiefs have recently come forward to express disagreement with the five hereditary chiefs’ protest. At the same time, mass protests across the country indicate a high level of frustration from the general population and Indigenous groups about the treatment of the Wet’suwet’en Nation by the RCMP and Canadian government.
In November 2019, B.C. became the first province in Canada to adopt the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), which requires that free, prior, and informed consent is given for large-scale development projects that will affect Indigenous nations.
However, the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD) released a document shortly after UNDRIP was adopted expressing concern over the lack of free, prior, and informed consent from Indigenous stakeholders regarding large-scale construction projects, including the Site C dam and the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion project.
If one thing has been made clear by these protests and the response to them, it’s that the Canadian government is not set up to constructively deal with Indigenous legal systems and governments, despite British Columbia’s acknowledgment of their right to exist.
Much of the negotiations have been hindered by pride, misunderstanding, and an unwillingness to engage. There is an excess of incomplete information and a lack of diverse voices. However, this isn’t only an issue of individuals. It is a systemic problem that must be addressed if these protests are going to have any lasting impact.
Environmental issues, land rights, the rail blockades, and the idea of rule of law are (obviously) deeply interconnected, but they are not all the same issue, yet they’re continuously being conflated. Because of this, many people who could be participating in the conversation feel like they can’t, and that’s keeping potential solutions from being brought forward.
Your opinion on the Wet’suwet’en protests doesn’t have to be — and shouldn’t be — one opinion. Polarization does not propel change for future generations.
