        |
|
Ferrell Sekacucu, a businessman, cattleman, restauranteur, grocer and service-station operator from the village of Shipaulovi (Second Mesa), was elected chairman of the Hopi Tribal Council on 2 February 1994. In the campaign that preceded the election, Sekacucu and his opponent, Ivan Sidney (past Chairman of the Hopi Tribe [1981-89], as well as past Hopi Chief of Police), found exceedingly little to disagree about. One issue that clearly united them was their total opposition to continuing mediation with the Navajo Nation, concerning relocation of Diné people from Big Mountain and other communities that are now enclosed within the boundaries of the HPL (Hopi Partitioned Lands). Both candidates took hard-line positions on enforcement of the 1974 "Navajo-Hopi Land Settlement Act" (PL 93-531, referred to here as the "Relocation Act"), legislation that orders the forced relocation of some 10,000 Diné and about 100 Hopi people.
The intent of this article is to expand the information offered in the preceding piece on Diné resistance to relocation, with a focus on current issues in Hopiland. As explained in the preceding article, the relocation project has been modified, delayed and extended well beyond its 1986 deadline, due to many complicating factors, not the least of which is the international scrutiny to which the process has been exposed, and the serious argument that it violates Diné human rights. Both Congress and the Administration have been reluctant to begin forced eviction of people who are guilty of doing nothing more than having been born into Diné families that resided legally (until 1974) on particular lands within the 1882 Executive Order Reservation, for which they were criminalized (becoming trespassers) through the Relocation Act. A forced eviction, with clear potential to become violent, is certain to be televised and exceedingly embarrassing for the United States.
Delays on relocation have been very frustrating for the "Hopi Tribe" (as the centralized government is referred to, and which is distinguished here from the Hopi people). Members of the Hopi Tribe, especially the cattlemen like Ferrell Sekacucu, are anxious to take over full control of the HPL, which was awarded to the Hopi Tribe by the Relocation Act. The Hopi Tribe feels that its "sovereign authority as an Indian nation" has been unfairly limited, due to the continued presence of Diné families on the HPL. The greatest present cause of delay in getting rid of the Diné is the legal reconsideration of the relocation, in a court-ordered mediation that resulted in the 1992 "Agreement in Principle" (AIP). The AIP was signed by the Hopi Tribe, the Navajo Nation, the attorney for the Diné Manybeads plaintiffs (who are resisting relocation), and the US Government (represented by the Justice and Interior departments). However, the AIP was rejected by the Diné resisters, when it was presented to them for ratification in August 1993. Since then, continuation of mediation has been uncertain, as the Hopi Tribe says it wants nothing more to do with the process.
Mr. Sekacucu apparently will continue the hard-line direction on relocation that was followed by out-going Chairman Vernon Masayesva, who did not seek re-election. Masayesva, over the course of his tenure (1989-93), travelled around the United States, speaking to various audiences of the importance of relocating the Diné. His speeches were typically vindictive denunciations in which he made several major points of argument, which are important to note as the point of departure of the new Hopi government.
First, Masayesva cast the struggle over the 1882 Reservation in terms of a national conflict between "the" Navajos and "the" Hopis, emphasizing the fact that "the" 200,000 Navajos greatly outnumber "the" 10,000 Hopis. The struggle can in fact be understood in this distortion of reality only since the 1930s, due to the imposition of a central Hopi government by the United States at that time (the "Navajo Nation" had been similarly imposed as a central government of the Diné in the 1920s). Before that, it was difficult to generalize about either people as a nation, as neither had any centralized locus of organization or political power, which was precisely the reason centralization was imposed to begin with. Any conflicts over land prior to 1882 took place between and were settled by various individuals and communities. While Navajos outnumber Hopis twenty to one, they are spread over a territory the size of Costa Rica, and Navajos who are not living in proximity to Hopiland often have little knowledge, contact or feeling about struggle with Hopi people, and in fact are (like other larger societies anywhere else) often unaware of the conditions of their own brethren elsewhere within their own territory. Hopis, meanwhile, are hopelessly divided among themselves, as discussed below.
Secondly, Masayesva's argument cast the Diné as "nomadic" encroachers, when in fact most of the people subject to relocation have a legacy in the region that dates back at least a half millenium, while others were shoved into the region as a result of US domination and expansion. Diné who inhabited the high ground of Black Mesa and the depths of Blue Canyon were not removed by Kit Carson during the Long Walk of the 1860s. Their presence certainly predates the establishment of the United States, while their distance of thirty miles or more from the Hopi mesas makes the idea of encroachment fairly dubious. Neither are the Diné nomads; as "transhumant pastoralists," they change residence over the course of seasons to bring their flocks to different pasture, but there is no evidence of a "national" encroachment with the object of dispossessing Hopis. There is no denying the fact, on the other hand, that Hopis were dispossessed of lands, due to policies of the United States.
Fourth World Bulletin • April 1994
Copyright © 1996 by the Fourth World Center
Created by Aigis Communications, Ltd