The Oka Crisis

Throughout history, the Native people of North America and the Europeans have continually had arguments and disputes over land. To this day there are still issues trying to be resolved. Twenty years ago, the beginning of one of the most violent and intense land disputes in present day Canada occurred. This event is now referred to as the Oka Crisis, named after the town Oka in Quebec. This crisis caused a confrontation involving the Quebec provincial police, the Canadian armed forces and the Mohawk people.1 The stand that the Mohawk people took in the town of Oka became a major revelation for the aboriginal people spreading awareness of aboriginal rights across Canada.

The Australian Indigenous community hold extremely significant corrections to the land of Australia, of which they refer to as ‘Country.’ Indigenous people acquire deep meaning from the land, sea and the countless resources derived from them. This special relationship has formed for many centuries. To them ‘Country’ is paramount for overall wellbeing; the strong, significant, spiritual bonds embody their entire existence. Knowledge is continually passed down to create an unbroken connection of past,

The rights and freedoms of Aboriginals have improved drastically since 1945 with many changes to government policy, cultural views and legal rules to bring about a change from oppression to equality. Unfortunately on the other hand, some rights and freedoms have not improved at all or have even worsened.

The Mohawk that were protesting to protect their traditional land, were bombarded with thousands of aggressive army members. The peaceful standoff turned violent and bloody when the army made contact with the protesters. Both sides of the standoff would be faced with conflicting loyalties because of their culture and nationalities. The Mohawk would be conflicted between defending historical property or being nationalistic to Canada. In the same view, the army would want to follow orders but could be conflicting between standing up against fellow Canadians. The source shows the tension between the contending groups, but also shows how each party felt about the matter. Their faces show the pain that is felt because of the land claim. When the government made the choice to expand a golf course onto the Oka land, even after Mohawk people formed complaints, they were cutting all ties with the Aboriginal group and creating tension within a

The Oka Crisis was a 78 Day standoff between Mohawk people and the town of Oka, Quebec . The crisis was initially caused by Mohawk protests on July 11th, 1990, when the town was planning to expand a golf course further onto First Nations land. When the golf course was originally built, it was 9 holes long and was constructed on disputed land, but the town of Oka and their mayor now wanted to expand this golf course to 18 holes to earn more profit and please other members of the community. Therefore, they would be taking over more of the land where the Mohawks had settled. The town of Oka, as well as many other provincial & federal governments and municipalities had taken away land belonging to First Nations people in the past, and the dispute over land in this small Quebec town had been occurring since 1717.

After twenty years of disputing land claims, there are still differing views over whether the relationship between the First Nations and the government improved. Over the past several decades, indigenous people in Canada have mounted hundreds of collective action events such as marches, road blockades, and land occupations. Moreover, the Oka Crisis is a land dispute between the Mohawks and the town of Oka, that began on July eleventh nineteen ninety and it lasted until the end of September of the same year. The seventy eight day standoff between Quebec police and the Mohawks of Kanesatake garnered a tremendous amount of media attention that summer. The dispute began with the idea of installing a golf course and two condominiums on a stretch

When first considering the Navajo-Hopi land dispute as a topic of research, I anticipated a relatively light research paper discussing the local skirmishes between the two tribes. However, my research has yielded innumerable volumes of facts, figures and varying viewpoints on a struggle that has dominated the two tribes for over 100 years. The story is an ever-changing one, evolving from local conflict to forcible relocation to big business interests. The incredible breadth of the dispute's history makes it impossible to objectively cover the entire progression from all viewpoints. I will therefore focus on current issues - and their historical causes - facing the two tribes as they mutually approach

The Canadian government was being deceitful towards the Mohawk peoples; they ignored their claims to the land and decided to build anyway. This was unjust act was bound to be followed by retaliation. Even after the crisis ended in September of 1990, one of the non-aboriginal locals stoned 75 cars that had aboriginal women, children, and elderly inside. This shows the hatred and disrespect for people who were just defending what was rightfully theirs. Cases like this one help to make Canadian's more aware of the current situation with the First Nations. It shows them how the government is and has been failing to treat the First Nations people fairly when it comes to their rights to the land.

The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe currently fights to save its only water source from natural gas and oil contamination. This troubling current event has a somewhat forgotten historical analogue where very similar themes presented themselves. The Kinzua Dam Controversy, which took place in the 1950’s and early 1960’s, resulted in the displacement of over 600 Seneca Indian families and the acquisition of a large tract of traditional Seneca Land for dam building. Additionally, the acquisition of Seneca land represented a breach of “The Treaty with the Six Nations of 1794,” which explicated prevented such action by the US Government. The dam and its construction, which primarily benefitted Pittsburg, inspired a heated discourse concerning the ethics of native relocation.

This photo was taken during the Oka Crisis in Quebec in 1990, when the government set in motion plans to build a golf course on the Mohawk First Nation's sacred burial ground. The Mohawk protested the development plans, and the government sent in police and eventually the military, leading to violence between the two groups. The two people in the photo symbolize the tension and aggression between the government and the Mohawk protesters. This source demonstrates clearly how the government failed to acknowledge the voices of all their people. They refused to give the Mohawk the land rights to their sacred burial ground, and then violated that land - destroying an important site of the Mowhawk's culture in order to construct something as menial as a golf course. The government ignored the protests of the Mohawk and their Aboriginal allies, eventually driving the conflict to violence. One officer died, and many others on both sides were injured, all stemming from the government's marginalization of Aboriginal

[Type the abstract of the document here. The abstract is typically a short summary of the contents of the document. Type the abstract of the document here. The abstract is typically a short summary of the contents of the document.]

The different sides of the clashing beliefs meet each other with violent opposition, but it is mostly the pro-government Indians who are the violent aggregators in this film. The civil war between the two extremes seems to be more than just the pro-government Indians harassing many of the traditionalists they come along. Nadell has also come up with a different theory as why this violence continues. Nadell believes that there are “two factors [which] appear to lie at the heart of this cycle of violence: Instrumental demand and racial self alienation” (Nadell 41). The instrumental demand and self alienation can be observed in the pro-government Indians. The pro-government Indians feel the need to rely on violence in order to gain the strategic benefit of intimidation of the traditionalists and material benefits such as “kickbacks from land leases” (Thunderheart). There is also racial self-alienation between the pro-government and the traditionalist. They are both supposed to be the same tribe and same people, yet they racially discriminate against each other because they have determined that the other half is doing a great injustice. The racial self-hate only provides more fuel to the fire as the pro-government Indians continue to harass and instigate the civil war between them.

[Type the abstract of the document here. The abstract is typically a short summary of the contents of the document. Type the abstract of the document here. The abstract is typically a short summary of the contents of the document.]

[Type the abstract of the document here. The abstract is typically a short summary of the contents of the document. Type the abstract of the document here. The abstract is typically a short summary of the contents of the document.]

Write the abstract here. Write a concise summary of the key points of your research. (Do not indent.) Your abstract should contain at least your research topic, research questions, participants, methods, results, data analysis, and conclusions. You may also include possible implications of your research and future work you see connected with your findings. Your abstract should be a single paragraph double-spaced. Your abstract should be between 150 and 250 words.