Resistance to a World That Looks Away: Indigenous Peoples as Eternal Actors amid Shifting World Orders—A Personal Chinese Translation of the Introduction to Volume 1 of the Handbook of North American Indians

Over the years, reservation-based institutions have continuously evolved, shaped by market opportunities, community cultural beliefs, shifting policies, and transformations in community values. The diversity of Indigenous peoples’ cultures and institutions is reflected in the diversity of their patterns of change and continuity. Some reservations have had opportunities to participate in local markets or the gaming industry; if economically successful, such activities can generate substantial economic returns for future development (Cattelino 2008a). Nevertheless, most successful Indigenous communities do not dissolve due to individual self-interest or assimilation. Collective assets, collective redistribution, and the strengthening of community culture all signify long-term guarantees for the survival of Indigenous rights and ways of life (Champagne 2007:45). The cultural-demographic composition (diversity and proportion) of Indigenous communities—as well as the current scope of their cultural assets—plays a crucial role in shaping Indigenous nations’ leadership and developmental trajectories. Communities with firm commitments to traditional culture, values, and institutions tend to preserve their cultural and institutional orders, striving to adapt to contemporary nation-states, markets, and globalized cultures on the basis of their traditional values and institutional relationships. In the United States, Pueblo peoples, many tribes of the Great Lakes region (see the chapter on the Northeast in this volume), and most California Indians have retained kinship-based communities and governance systems while operating large-scale gaming enterprises and increasingly diversified economies. In both Canada and the United States, membership in Indigenous nations has become highly legalized (T. King 2012:68); it is typically based on lineage and, in the U.S., often expressed as blood quantum. Yet in practice, blood quantum does not always serve as a clear indicator of an individual’s Indigenous cultural orientation or political convictions. In Canada, the Territory of Nunavut—established in 1999—is predominantly inhabited by Inuit and may one day become a province of Canada. These changes occur within the framework of Canada’s constitutional system, rules, and regulations. Nunavut’s legislative and administrative bodies are Inuit-majority, yet their authority does not derive from Indigenous self-government theory (Ejesiak 2008:246). In British Columbia, approximately 100 Indigenous nations have engaged in treaty negotiations with the provincial government for fifteen years, seeking agreements on sovereignty, health, land, and language rights (Alfred 2005; Ministry of Aboriginal Relations and Reconciliation 2011). Roughly twenty Canadian First Nations are striving to escape certain restrictions imposed by the 1969 Indian Act, aspiring to greater autonomy over reserves, management of oil and gas funds, access to bond markets, and authority to enact commercial regulations comparable to those of provincial governments. However, in 2006, a bill designed to grant First Nations the right to establish their own constitutional governments was defeated in the Canadian Parliament (Parliament of Canada 2006).

Canada’s total surface area is 10 million (officially 9.9 million) square kilometers, including inland seas—such as Hudson Bay (Baie d’Hudson)—as well as Arctic islands. This concept of an inland sea is not recognized under international law, which classifies territorial waters and exclusive economic zones together. The Canadian government maintains that these waters are linked by ice cover, thereby ensuring their continuity. From a legal perspective, climate change has already lifted regulatory constraints on this maritime space. Canada lies at the heart of current major issues because its waters are associated with various activities. Though Canada’s total area is 10 million square kilometers, only 9.3 million square kilometers exclude inland waters. Canada is the world’s second-largest country after Russia, distinguished by its vast expanse. Canada claims Hudson Bay as a historic bay—that is, although not classified as internal waters, it is treated as such. As noted above, the territorial sea extends 12 nautical miles offshore. Where a bay’s mouth is less than 24 nautical miles wide, the enclosed waters constitute internal waters, subject to full national sovereignty. Hudson Bay’s narrowest point measures approximately 50 nautical miles, meaning it does not qualify as internal waters under this criterion. However, the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea includes a special provision for ‘historic bays’: bays whose shores belong to a single state, whose mouth exceeds twice the coastal state’s territorial sea breadth, yet which have historically been regarded as internal waters of that coastal state. Historic bays are generally declared unilaterally by states and thus frequently provoke disputes. Canada’s claim, however, faces no objections—due to its remoteness, lack of neighboring claimants, and perceived low strategic significance. This vastness profoundly affects political and territorial matters in ways entirely distinct from those of smaller countries. Strictly speaking, territorially, Canada has consisted for decades of ten southern provinces. Northern and southern regions play different roles: northern territories are administered directly by the federal government in Ottawa. Their internal political organization comprises legislative, executive, and judicial powers—all guaranteed by Ottawa. The weight of federal authority significantly influences these territories, especially regarding land matters. With two exceptions, each territory possesses a land base managed by federal authorities—primarily government departments. Within the provincial framework—comparable to U.S. federal states—there exists an executive authority (Premier or Premier Minister). This provincial minister heads the provincial government and fulfills core executive functions alongside the legislature (the provincial parliament) and the judiciary operating at the provincial level. Institutional arrangements at the federal level mirror this structure exactly. The Supreme Court consists of twelve appointed judges serving nine-year terms. This organizational structure reflects the division of powers (federalism), provincial responsibilities (e.g., education), and shared responsibilities (e.g., transportation). Since then, the first four provinces have acquired full ownership of their lands, except where land falls under Indigenous jurisdiction or enjoys federal status as a national park. Nunavut constitutes a special case. Prior to March 31, 1999, Nunavut formed part of the Northwest Territories. On April 1, 1999, following negotiations with Indigenous communities—primarily Inuit—Nunavut was granted provincial status. The territory spans 2.3 million square kilometers, a small portion of which has been fully allocated to Inuit. The portion granted provincial status covers 360,000 square kilometers of an archipelago.

Nunavut Premier Urges Canada to Lift Arctic Oil and Gas Drilling Moratorium

22 hours ago

Nunavut Premier John Main urged the Canadian federal government to lift its decade-long Arctic offshore oil and gas drilling moratorium to boost local revenue and reduce dependency on transfers. Prime Minister Mark Carney is considering the move amid economic pressures, despite environmental concerns.

reuters

2026-11-12

Nunavut Premier Urges Canada to Lift Arctic Oil and Gas Drilling Moratorium

Nunavut Premier Urges Canada to Lift Arctic Oil and Gas Drilling Moratorium

FAQ