…

…

FLAGSTAFF, Ariz. — A Native American tribe with one of the largest outstanding claims to water in the Colorado River basin is closing in on a settlement with more than a dozen parties, putting it on a path to piping water to tens of thousands of tribal members in Arizona who still live without it.

Negotiating terms outlined late Wednesday include water rights not only for the Navajo Nation but the neighboring Hopi and San Juan Southern Paiute tribes in the northeastern corner of the state. The water would come from a mix of sources: the Colorado River that serves seven western states, the Little Colorado River, and aquifers and washes on tribal lands.

The agreement is decades in the making and would allow the tribes to avoid further litigation and court proceedings, which have been costly. Navajo officials said they expect to finalize the terms in the coming days.

From there, it must be approved by the tribe’s governing bodies, the state of Arizona, the other parties and by Congress.

“We have the right Congress, we have the right president, and it’s very hopeful,” Navajo President Buu Nygren told The Associated Press on Wednesday. “Because next year might be a whole different ballgame. It’s going to be very uncertain.”

The proposal comes as Native American tribes, states in the Colorado River basin and Mexico are working on a long-term plan to share a diminishing water source that has served 40 million people. Tribes, including the Navajo Nation, were left out of a landmark 1922 treaty that divided the water in the basin among seven states.

The Navajo Nation has long argued that states treat the tribe as an afterthought. Any settlement reached would be separate from that long-term plan and stand on its own.

About one-third of the homes on the Navajo Nation do not have running water. Infrastructure projects outlined by the Navajo Nation include a $1.7 billion pipeline to deliver water from Lake Powell to tribal communities. The caveat being that there is no guarantee that Congress will provide the funding.

Both the Navajo and Hopi tribes are seeking the ability to lease water and to store it in existing or new reservoirs and impoundments.

“Some of our families that still live within those communities still have to haul water to cook their food, to make lemonade in the summer for their kids, to make ice, all little simple things to make your daily life easy and convenient,” Navajo Nation Council Speaker Crystalyne Curley said.

On Wednesday, the Navajo Nation cited climate change, cost, competition for water and the coronavirus pandemic as reasons to move toward a settlement. Arizona, in turn, would benefit by having certainty over the amount of water that is available to non-tribal users. The state has had to cut its use of Colorado River water in recent years because of drought and demand.

Tom Buschatzke, director of the Arizona Department of Water Resources, said Wednesday that while progress is being made on a settlement with the Navajo Nation, the agreement isn’t complete.

Sarah Langley, a spokeswoman for Flagstaff, the largest city that is a party to the settlement, said it is hopeful the negotiations are productive.

Arizona — situated in the Colorado River’s Lower Basin with California, Nevada and Mexico — is unique in that it also has an allocation in the Upper Basin. Under the settlement terms, Navajo and Hopi would get about 47,000 acre-feet in the Upper Basin — nearly the entire amount that was set aside for use at the Navajo Generating Station, a coal-fired power plant on the Navajo reservation that shut down in late 2019.

The proposal also includes about 9,500 acre-feet per year of lower-priority water from the Lower Basin for both tribes. An acre-foot of water is roughly enough to serve two to three U.S. households annually.  

While the specific terms for the San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe remain under discussion, Congress could be asked to establish a small reservation for the tribe whose ancestral land lies in Utah and Arizona. The tribe’s president, Robbin Preston Jr., didn’t immediately respond to emailed questions from the AP.

The Hopi Tribe’s general counsel, Fred Lomayesva, declined to comment.  

The Navajo Nation, whose 27,000 square-mile (70,000 square-kilometer) reservation also stretches into New Mexico and Utah, already has settled its claims to the Colorado River basin there.

The Navajo and Hopi tribes came close to reaching a pact with Arizona to settle water rights in 2012. Both tribes rejected federal legislation that accompanied it, and the tentative deal fell through. It also wasn’t broadly supported by Navajos and Hopis who saw negotiations as secretive, leading to a loose effort to recall then-Navajo President Ben Shelly and then-Hopi Chairman LeRoy Shingoitewa.  

Recently, the Navajo Nation Water Rights Commission has been holding public hearings across the reservation to ensure tribal members are aware of what is involved in a settlement and why the tribe pursued it, tribal officials said.

“We have a united front to our chapters, our schools and even our small businesses, families,” Curley said. “It’s inclusive of everyone. Everybody should be able to know what the terms are.” 

The federal government in recent years has poured money into tribal water rights settlements. The U.S. Supreme Court also ruled the government does not have a treaty duty to take affirmative steps to secure water for the Navajo Nation, complicating the tribe’s fight for water. 
…

…

WASHINGTON — The United States on Saturday began airdrops of emergency humanitarian assistance into Gaza. President Joe Biden, who announced the operation Friday, said the U.S. was looking into additional ways to help Palestinians in the Hamas-ruled territory as the Israel-Hamas war goes on. Here is a look at what to know:

When did the airdrops start?

Three C-130 cargo planes from Air Forces Central dropped 66 bundles containing about 35,000 meals into Gaza at 8:30 a.m. EST Saturday. The bundles were dropped in southwest Gaza, on the beach along the territory’s Mediterranean coast, one U.S. official said.

The airdrop was coordinated with the Royal Jordanian Air Force, which has been airdropping food and took part in Saturday’s mission.

More airdrops are expected to follow.

Why now?

Biden’s decision comes after at least 115 Palestinians were killed and more than 750 others were injured Thursday trying to access aid in northern Gaza under disputed circumstances, according to Gaza’s Hamas-run Health Ministry. Witnesses said Israeli troops opened fire as huge crowds raced to pull goods off an aid convoy, while Israel has said that it fired only when its troops felt threatened and that most of the civilian casualties were from trampling.

The U.S. has been pushing Israel to speed the flow of humanitarian assistance into Gaza and to open a third crossing into the territory, but the violence Thursday showed the challenges no matter the circumstances.

“The loss of life is heartbreaking,” Biden said as he announced his decision to order airdrops. “People are so desperate.”

How will the U.S. ensure aid gets to where it’s needed?

Asked how the U.S. would keep the supplies from falling into Hamas’ hands, White House national security spokesperson John Kirby told reporters that the U.S. would learn over the course of the aerial operation.

“There’s few military operations that are more complicated than humanitarian assistance airdrops,” he said. Kirby said Pentagon planners will identify drop locations aiming to balance getting the aid closest to where it’s needed without putting those on the ground in harm’s way from the drops themselves.

“The biggest risk is making sure nobody gets hurt on the ground,” Kirby said. He said the U.S. is also working through how the airdropped aid will be collected and distributed once it’s on the ground.

Will it make a difference?

The U.S. believes the airdrops will help address the dire humanitarian situation in Gaza, but they are no replacement for trucks, which can transport far more aid more effectively — although Thursday’s events also showed the risks with ground transport.

Kirby said the airdrops have an advantage over trucks in that planes can move aid to a particular location very quickly. But in terms of volume, the airdrops will be “a supplement to, not a replacement for, moving things in by ground.”

What else can be done?

The U.S. and allies have tried to broker a new temporary cease-fire between Hamas and Israel that would see the release of more hostages held by the militant group in Gaza, the freeing of some Palestinian prisoners in Israeli jails and an up-to-six-week pause in the fighting.

If a cease-fire were secured, the U.S. hopes it would allow large quantities of aid to flow into Gaza over a sustained period. Biden said Friday the U.S. was working with allies on establishing a “maritime corridor” to provide assistance to Palestinians from the sea.
…

Washington — Thirty-one members of the U.S. Congress recently signed a letter to President Joe Biden and Secretary of State Antony Blinken urging them to not recognize a new government in Pakistan until an investigation into allegations of election interference has been conducted. Voters in Pakistan went to polls on February 8.

On election day, mobile services were blocked by Pakistani authorities and there were cases of violence. Many political leaders and activists were arrested in the weeks before the elections. There was an unusual delay in issuing the election results. All these things led to accusations that the vote was rigged.

VOA Urdu Service reporter Iram Abbasi interviewed U.S. Representative Greg Casar, a Texas Democrat, who wrote the letter to Biden.

The following transcript has been edited for clarity and brevity.

VOA: What are the three demands put forward to the White House and State Department in your letter?

U.S. Representative Greg Casar: I’ve led a group of over 30 members of Congress asking the United States and the White House to, one, withhold recognition of the folks that say they won the Pakistani election until an independent investigation is completed, showing that the election was not rigged.

Second, we are urging the release of any of those wrongfully detained for engaging in political free speech or just political activity, because people should be able to be journalists, to be able to be candidates, to be able to be political activists without fear of detention or violence against them.

And lastly, we want to make it very clear that the United States security assistance to the military in Pakistan and, frankly, to the military anywhere in the world, is contingent on following strong human rights standards.

VOA: What motivated you to lead a group of 31 lawmakers to write this letter to the president and Secretary Blinken?

Casar: If we believe in democracy [in] the United States, then we should believe in democracy everywhere, especially when it comes to our allies.

I, myself, have long studied how the United States suppressed democracy in Latin America. Far too often in Latin America, the United States supposedly was leading on democracy but instead let oligarchs, let large corporations, and let military interests override the will of the people.

And so, the United States supported coups, supported military governments and suppressed democracy in Latin America. And that ultimately hurt, not just Latin Americans, but also hurt people in the United States. It did not work. It did not work economically. It did not work for our safety. The same should apply with [the] United States and Pakistan. We should not simply let geopolitics or corporations or our military alliance override our core value of democracy.

VOA: You’ve just said that the U.S. has supported coups around the world. Some would argue that with this letter, you might be asking the U.S. to meddle in the internal politics of Pakistan.

Casar: We are not meddling in those internal politics. In fact, the question is whether or not there was a free and fair election. So, our interest is not whether one group or another group wins an election. The people of Pakistan should be able to decide their own election. … We have very clear laws that aid is contingent on human rights being respected, free speech being respected. We do not want the United States taxpayer dollars to go to militaries that then use that money to incarcerate journalists or suppress free speech or suppress political parties.

VOA: I’ve spoken to the State Department about this previously because these efforts have been made in the past as well. And their stance is that they want the people of Pakistan to decide who their leader should be. What would you say to that?

Casar: I agree that they should have that … we should not meddle in domestic politics and that whoever the people of Pakistan want to be elected by majority vote, that’s who should be elected. So, the question is, did that happen? And there is extensive video evidence, extensive testimony. And in fact, the State Department knows that there are very credible allegations that are on video, of things happening before the election and allegations after the election that are very concerning to the United States, but are also very concerning, even more concerning, to the people of Pakistan. So, I am not saying that we should withhold recognition of a government for no reason. We should only make sure that the will of the people of Pakistan is heard.

VOA: What do you think you would be able to achieve with this letter if the State Department has received such requests in the past? As you said, there are examples of how journalists are being put in jail and how there are several voices in Pakistan who are saying that elections are allegedly rigged. The government denies that. But what do you think you’ll be able to achieve out of it?

Casar: I think if there is an independent and credible investigation into these allegations and it is determined that the elections either were significantly rigged or were not, but the United States and a coalition of nations stands behind whatever the investigation finds — that will be very powerful and very important on the world stage and hopefully will help us get to a more stable and secure and democratic Pakistan, which is good for the entire world, because, as you know, this is a country of over 200 million people. This isn’t a small thing for the world.

VOA: In your letter, there is this notion that there was pre-poll rigging, along with the allegations of election rigging. Your letter seems to include that sentiment toward former Prime Minister Imran Khan, as though he was put in jail for the wrong reasons, or he had not been given a fair trial?

Casar: I believe that everyone deserves a fair trial, and it is so important for him [to receive a fair trial]. … The people of Pakistan want to be able to recognize this and know that their elections are fair and that their leadership was chosen fairly. And so, I think a fair trial for him is important. It’s important for everyone, but it is important, of course, for those political leaders. Again, I have no interest in whether he or anyone else leads Pakistan. That is not our interest in the United States. Pakistan should be able to determine its own domestic politics. 
…

PHOENIX — An Apache group that has fought to protect land it considers sacred from a copper mining project in central Arizona suffered a significant blow Friday when a divided federal court panel voted 6-5 to uphold a lower court’s denial of a preliminary injunction to halt the transfer of land for the project.

The Apache Stronghold organization has hoped to halt the mining project by preventing the U.S. government from transferring the land called Oak Flat to Resolution Copper.

Wendsler Nosie, who has led Apache Stronghold’s fight, vowed to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court the decision by the rare 11-member “en banc” panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

“Oak Flat is like Mount Sinai to us — our most sacred site where we connect with our Creator, our faith, our families, and our land,” Nosie said. “Today’s ruling targets the spiritual lifeblood of my people, but it will not stop our struggle to save Oak Flat.”

Apache Stronghold represents the interests of certain members of the San Carlos Apache Tribe. The Western Apaches consider Oak Flat, which is dotted with ancient oak groves and traditional plants, essential to their religion.

Oak Flat also sits atop the world’s third-largest deposit of copper ore, and there is significant support in nearby Superior and other traditional mining towns in the area for a new copper mine and the income and jobs it could generate.

An environmental impact survey for the project was pulled back while the U.S. Department of Agriculture consulted for months with Native American tribes and others about their concerns.

Apache Stronghold had sued the government to stop the land transfer, saying it would violate its members’ rights under the free exercise clause of the First Amendment, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act and an 1852 treaty between the United States and the Apaches.

The majority opinion of the appeals panel said that “Apache Stronghold was unlikely to succeed on the merits on any of its three claims before the court, and consequently was not entitled” to a preliminary injunction.

The dissenting five judges said the majority had “tragically” erred and will allow the government to “obliterate Oak Flat.”

Apache Stronghold, represented by the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, has 90 days to appeal to the Supreme Court.

“Blasting a Native American sacred site into oblivion is one of the most egregious violations of religious freedom imaginable,” said Luke Goodrich, vice president and senior counsel at Becket. “The Supreme Court has a strong track record of protecting religious freedom for people of other faiths, and we fully expect the Court to uphold that same freedom for Native Americans who simply want to continue core religious practices at a sacred site that has belonged to them since before the United States existed.”

Vicky Peacey, Resolution Copper president and general manager, welcomed the ruling, saying there was significant local support for the project, which has the potential to supply up to one quarter of U.S. copper demand.

Peacey said it could bring as much as $1 billion a year to Arizona’s economy and create thousands of local jobs in a traditional mining region.

“As we deliver these benefits to Arizona and the nation, our dialogue with local communities and Tribes will continue to shape the project as we seek to understand and address the concerns that have been raised, building on more than a decade of government consultation and review,” Peacey said.

U.S. Raúl M. Grijalva, an Arizona Democrat, called the court’s decision “wrong.”

“Tribal communities deserve the same religious freedom protections for their sacred sites that are respected for every other American,” Grijalva said. “The court acknowledges that foreign-owned Resolution Copper will completely and irreversibly desecrate Oak Flat, but they’re giving them the green light anyways.”

“It’s a slap in the face to tribal sovereignty and the many tribes, including the San Carlos Apache, who have been fighting to protect a site they have visited and prayed at since time immemorial,” he added.
…