In Historic Move, US Endorses UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples

On Wednesday, the United States endorsed the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

It was the last of four “hold-out” countries (Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the U.S.) to endorse the Declaration, originally passed by the UN General Assembly in 2007.

The State Department announced the change in the U.S. position, saying that the Declaration “while not legally binding or a statement of current international law—has both moral and political force.”

Many organizations, national and international, had pushed the Obama administration to endorse the document.

The group Cultural Survival, for example, mounted an online campaign urging supporters to write President Obama about the issue, pointing out that the UN Declaration “marks the first time the United Nations has agreed on a single set of values governing relations between national governments and Indigenous Peoples living within their borders.”

The endorsement is seen as partial fulfillment of a promise made by President Obama in proclaiming November as “National Native American Heritage Month.”

As we celebrate the contributions and heritage of Native Americans during this month, we also recommit to supporting tribal self-determination, security, and prosperity for all Native Americans. While we cannot erase the scourges or broken promises of our past, we will move ahead together in writing a new, brighter chapter in our joint history. [Emphasis added]

Robert Coulter, Indian Law Resource Center

Robert T. Coulter, executive director of the Indian Law Resource Center, was one of the primary authors of the Declaration from its inception in 1976. While celebrating the historic victory Wednesday, Coulter reminded Native Americans that with the U.S. endorsement “our work to ensure justice for Indian nations in this country begins in earnest.

He advised supporters:

In our work for Indian rights, we can and should use the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples as a powerful affirmation of our rights. Only through continued use will its provisions become our reality. We can use the Declaration to evaluate laws that are now on the books and for laws that may be proposed. Does the law measure up to the standards of the Declaration? Does the law or bill satisfy the requirements of the Declaration? It should. And if it does not, then it should be changed or discarded.

The Declaration can also be used as a guide for procedures and processes in dealing with indigenous peoples. Some of the most important rights in the Declaration are the right to participate in the decision-making process and the right to be consulted on important matters relating to indigenous peoples. The rights proclaimed in the Declaration can also be used to defend against proposals and actions that violate Indian rights. The Declaration can be used in this way by all people: Indian leaders, public officials, educators, and others.

The Declaration can also be used to support and advocate for positive legislation and positive government action relating to Indian peoples. In particular, the Declaration can be used as a basis for making demands that the federal government fulfill its responsibilities to tribes and carry out its obligations to promote and respect the human rights of Indian nations and tribes. Congress needs to hold hearings to examine the United States’ human rights obligations to Indians and to assess whether existing laws and policies adequately respect the rights established in international law.

Here’s the full text of the UN Declaration:


United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples -

Dirty numbers | The 200 Most Polluting Power Plants in the World

The World’s 200 Dirtiest Power Plants

Forbes.com has an interactive map of the dirtiest coal power plants. Click on the graphic below and you’ll be sent directly to the map. Writer Jon Bruner introduces the map:

“Sixty percent of the world’s electricity comes from plants burning fossil fuels and releasing carbon. Many of the highest-emission plants are concentrated in the United States and East Asia. Here, a look at the world’s 200 biggest carbon offenders among power plants. Roll over any plant for more information.”

Click to go to interactive map

Click to go to interactive map

Taichung power plant

Taichung plantThe “worst of the worst” is Taiwan’s Taichung power plant, emitting 40 million tons of carbon annually.

That’s a lot of carbon, a lot of CO2 pumped up into earth’s atmosphere forcing climate change.

America doesn’t have anything of this magnitude, do we?

Not exactly. The dirtiest power plant in the United States is the Robert Scherer power plant near Juliette, Georgia.

Each year, it produces 27 million tons of carbon — about 67% of what the Taiwanese plant emits.

Scherer power plant, Georgia

Scherer power plant, Georgia

Twenty-seven million tons of carbon is still a lot to be pumping into the air. And that’s just a fraction of the 800 million tons of carbon produced by the 53 U.S. coal-fired power plants that made Forbes’ “Dirtiest 200” list.

Of course there are several ways to crunch these numbers. For example: by comparing the per capita CO2 emissions between nations.

According to data from the Energy Information Administration, the United States emitted 19.78 tons of CO2 per capita in 2006.

Taiwan emitted “just” 13.19 tons.

That earns the US the number two spot in per capita emissions among nations, with Taiwan coming in at number eight.* (Leading the pack is Australia, with a per capita emissions rate of 20.58 tons.)

Turning, small

Per capita emissions data from: H.1cco2 World Per Capita Carbon Dioxide Emissions from the Consumption and Flaring of Fossil Fuels, 1980-2006, metric tons of CO2, Energy Information Administration.

* Among countries with populations of five million or more. Although Gibraltar was number one in per capita emissions (with a whopping 160.22 tons), the British colony has a population of 28,000 people. It doesn’t seem helpful to include the Gib or other small nations in this ranking. A country needed to have at least five million residents to be included — or about the same size as Dallas-Ft. Worth.