Treaty Violations and Native American Sovereignty

The Nature of International Treaties

An international treaty is a legally binding agreement between sovereign states, established through extensive negotiations and formalized by ratification within the legal frameworks of the involved nations. These treaties carry the weight of international law and are expected to be honored by the signatory parties. Violations of treaties can lead to diplomatic disputes, economic sanctions, or even conflict. It is imperative that the terms of a treaty are clearly understood and agreed upon by all parties, often necessitating translations into the official languages of the signatories. This understanding of treaties is vital when examining historical agreements, such as those between the United States and various Native American tribes.

The Doctrine of Discovery's Influence on Indigenous Peoples

The Doctrine of Discovery, established by the papal bulls in the 15th century and later codified in the Treaty of Tordesillas, granted European Christian nations the right to claim territories inhabited by non-Christians. This doctrine was incorporated into U.S. policy, as evidenced by statements from Thomas Jefferson and the Supreme Court's 1823 decision in Johnson v. M'Intosh, which held that indigenous inhabitants had a right of occupancy but not of sovereignty over their lands. This legal framework justified the dispossession and marginalization of Native American peoples, as European discovery claims were seen to override indigenous land rights.

Treaty-Making with Native American Tribes: A Troubled History

The United States' treaty-making with Native American tribes was often marked by inequality and coercion. The Treaty of Paris (1783), which ended the American Revolutionary War, transferred Native lands to the United States without the consent or participation of Native Americans. This set a precedent for subsequent treaties, which were frequently negotiated without genuine representation or agreement from Native tribes, as seen in the Treaty of Fort Pitt (1778), the first treaty between the United States and a Native American tribe, which lacked fair representation and input from the affected indigenous communities.

Coercion in Treaty Negotiations with Native American Nations

The U.S. government frequently resorted to coercive tactics in treaty negotiations with Native American nations. Strategies such as those proposed by Thomas Jefferson aimed to economically entrap Native Americans, compelling them to cede lands to settle debts. Negotiators often appointed unrepresentative "chiefs," utilized translators who deliberately misconstrued treaty terms, and sometimes manipulated Native Americans through intoxication or bribery to secure land cessions. These underhanded methods resulted in treaties that were neither equitable nor reflective of the collective will of Native American peoples.

The Unfulfilled Promises of Treaties with Native American Tribes

Although treaties with Native American tribes were meant to acknowledge their sovereignty and establish mutually binding commitments, the U.S. government frequently reneged on these agreements. The Senate often amended treaties post-ratification, and the government regularly failed to make the agreed-upon payments, pressuring Native Americans into relinquishing additional lands. The Delaware Treaty of 1778, violated within years by the U.S., and the Treaty of Mendota of 1851, where the Dakota were coerced into ceding territory for unmet promises, exemplify the pattern of unfulfilled commitments and exploitation.

Enduring Consequences of Treaty Breaches and Contemporary Relevance

The legacy of treaty breaches between the United States and Native American tribes has resulted in significant loss of land and sovereignty for indigenous peoples. Today, Native American lands are a fraction of their historical extent, with many tribes continuing to seek legal recognition and rights to their ancestral territories. The relevance of these treaty violations persists, as demonstrated by the controversy surrounding the Dakota Access Pipeline, which opponents argue violates the Fort Laramie Treaty of 1868. These ongoing issues underscore the necessity of upholding treaty obligations and respecting the sovereignty of Native American tribes.