The Anthropology Of Genocide - WNLibrary

confronting genocide of indigenous peoples 75
1993a–c; Albert 1994; Ramos 1995). When it was learned that the number of people
shot and dismembered was “only” sixteen, international interest in the case
waned. Subsequently, when charges were traded about possible complicity on the
part of social scientists and missionaries in the processes that led up to the massacre,
public interest was piqued again, but it subsided after the governments of
Brazil and Venezuela argued that the situation was not as bad as had been claimed.
The governments of countries in which indigenous peoples face severe human
rights problems routinely deny that the situation is as bad as is portrayed in the media,
by advocacy groups, or by the oral testimonies of individuals claiming violation
of human rights. The same is true of those private companies in areas where
indigenous peoples are being affected by development and environmental change.
It should be emphasized that there are frequently serious conflicts of interest between
states and private companies operating inside their borders. In the 1980s and
early 1990s, the United Nations Economic and Social Council Commission on
Transnational Corporations drew up a Code of Conduct for transnational corporations,
but as of early 1999 the code had yet to be implemented.
There has been marked opposition to indigenous peoples’ efforts to re-establish
their land and resource rights, not only from states but also from private companies
seeking access to minerals and other resources. Today, some of the greatest
problems faced by indigenous groups in terms of land and resource rights derive
from transnational corporations, private companies, and individuals who are pressuring
governments to reduce their efforts in behalf of indigenous land rights, as
can be seen, for example, in Australia, Brazil, and Mexico.
Efforts are being made by intergovernmental organizations, indigenous associations,
development and human rights–oriented nongovernmental organizations,
and interested individuals to draw up guidelines for development and conservation
project implementation that protect both local people and their ecosystems. The
problem with many of these guidelines, however, is that they rarely, if ever, are enforced.
Although detailed international standards have been established for handling
the resettlement of people affected by large-scale infrastructure projects (see,
for example, World Bank 1991), there are few cases in which all or even most of
the steps have been followed. The result has been that a majority of the people who
have been forcibly relocated, numbering in the tens of millions, have ended up
much worse off after relocation (Scully 1996; Scudder 1997a, 1997b; World Commission
on Dams 2000).
There have been few cases where companies or development agencies have been
required to change their tactics or to follow international standards. As yet there
are no internationally accepted principles by which companies, development institutions,
or conservation organizations must operate. The consequence is that
indigenous groups face major problems.
In response, indigenous groups have begun to organize among themselves in
an effort to oppose genocidal practices and promote human rights (Durning 1992;
Wilmer 1993; Hitchcock and Biesele 2000). How successful these efforts will be very