Between Indigenous Nations and the State

Self-Determination in the Balance

Rudolph C. Rÿser, PhD

Abstract

In this 1999 article, Dr. Rÿser examines the relationship between Indian nations and the U.S. government regarding self-determination, alongside U.S. international policy toward Indigenous peoples. He highlights contradictions in U.S. policy and discusses future possibilities for Indigenous nations. Dr. Rÿser first reviews the Western origins of sovereignty and its selective application, alongside the long history of U.S. interference in Indian affairs justified through the doctrines of plenary power and political question, showing how hope has emerged as this system began to be dismantled under President Johnson and through the 1993 trial self-governance compacts with four Northwest tribes. He then links internal reforms to international efforts, noting a disconnect between the State Department and the Department of the Interior. Dr. Rÿser critiques U.S. leadership at international forums like ILO Convention 169 and the draft UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, arguing that Indigenous rights were undermined by weakening language around “peoples” and “self-determination.” He outlines the State Department’s view that international law should impose only minimal obligations, that local realities must be considered, and that collective rights are not part of international law. Dr. Rÿser emphasizes that this back-step — treating self-determination narrowly and politically minimizing Indigenous rights — shows the State Department’s obliviousness to international realities, real-world consequences, and its prior commitments. He warns that, as a result, Indigenous groups are increasingly forced to take matters into their own hands internationally. He calls for Indian nations within the U.S. to engage internationally, cautioning that while domestic self-governance is progressing, these international policy shifts could threaten future gains.