Inuit Relocation (Case Study Sample)

Title:
Author:
College:
Abstract
Inuit is a general term describing the people inhabiting the arctic coasts of Alaska and the eastern islands of the Canadian arctic. The people share similar culture to Kalaallit of Greenland, and Alaska’s Inupiaq. The Canadian Inuit occupy the regions of Nunavut, Nunavik and the Labrador settlement. Initially, the Inuit in North America received similar classification with the other Native Americans, a classification that is now losing ground. With time, the Inuit have come to be recognized as a separate ethnic entity. The economic activities of the Inuit involved hunting and fishing. They lived off the arctic animal life. Animals of preference included whales and seals. Archaeological evidence points to their existence in the region as far back as 12,000 years. The mode of transport involved the use of dog drawn sleds whose make include animal bones and skins. Landmarks obtained wide usage to ease the process of navigation. Before the establishment of government administered settlements, the Inuit did not have permanent settlements. They, however, built stable communities in certain regions. The communities revolved around kinship ties consisting of couple or more extended families related through marriage. Community continuity solely relied on mutual support and voluntary participation. There lacked a formal leadership structure and no person had power over the other (Stern, 2010). Up until 1950’s, the Inuit continued with their traditional way of life. They, however, became accustomed to the southern Canadian culture due to constant contact with the people. It is around this time that the cold war began. The American military stationed in the region criticized the Canadian government over what they cited as negligence of the Inuit people. The federal government embarked on construction of towns and villages which were hired out at subsidized rates to encourage the Inuit to settle permanently. It is this coerced settlement that raises the question of whether the relocations were justified and whether it considered the interests of the Inuit.
Several factors could have motivated the Canadian government the relocation. Towards the cold war, permanent settlements were on the rise in the previously sparsely inhabited lands. The Inuit by then had multiplied in number and could not rely on their subsistence practices. This led to prevalence of starvation. This was an object of criticism from the American troops in the region and prompted the action by the federal government. The argument of the relocation was based on effective provision of amenities to the communities. Through the introduction of schools and health services, the Inuit moved further into permanent settlement. The government enforcement on schooling for children led the families to settle around the schools so as not to be separated from their children. The children, however, were not enough to support a full high school in many areas. This prompted students from various regions to be boarded together (Doern, 2005). The settlement was also politically motivated in an effort to ensure that the Inuit received the same rights and privilege like other Canadian citizens.
What can be seen as another motivating factor for the resettlement is territorial sovereignty. The international law requires physical occupancy of the lands that a country claims to be part of its territory. Although the Canadian government had claims on the Arctic Archipelago, they had done little to claim the land. Though not under threat from any nation, government officials may have hatched the relocation I order to seal the Canadian claim on the arctic islands. This saw the relocation of Inuit from Nunavik to the high arctic. This happened during the period in which United States military held bases in the Canadian islands. The threat was perhaps the view United States held on the Arctic Ocean being an international waterway. If the action had not been taken, the United States could have laid claims on the unoccupied islands. It was, therefore, necessary for the Canadian government to act with speed to ensure territorial integrity (Stern, 2010).
The other reason prompting the relocation was the effect of the Cold War. The tension between the western nations and the Soviet Union had far reaching consequences in prompting the relocation of the Inuit. The United States together with its NATO allies began the process of building the Distant Early Warning (DEW) line radar network which served the areas of North America, Greenland and northwestern Europe (Wachowich et al, 2001). This meant that the Inuit in those regions had to evacuate. Failure to relocate meant that the people had to endure noise and environmental degradation associated with military activity. Similarly, the United States military set their eyes on the village of Kaktovik to build radar system and an airstrip. This meant forced evictions of the village dwellers that were caught off guard. There was no notice for eviction.
The other reason for relocation is rather selfish on the government side. This was administrative expediency combined with the lack of commitment to continue providing health and welfare services to the people. Following the signing of the Northern Quebec and James Bay land claims, the federal government began to withdraw medical, education and other services from the Killiniq village. The government accused the Inuit as being part of the 1975 lands claim agreement. Half of the population moved into other settlements. The remaining residents were then hurriedly evacuated and the town closed down. This had far reaching consequences as the residents were forced to leave behind many of their possessions. The people were relocated to five different areas bringing about separation of the family system. This created confusion and tension since the residents of the areas of relocation were also not made aware of expected arrivals (Henderson, 2007). This relocation bore similarity with that of the Hudson Bay back in 1950. In this incident, the government repeatedly relocated people living near Ennadai and Gary lakes citing the over dependence on the personnel at a nearby radar station and catholic mission respectively. These relocations culminated in several deaths due to starvation. The cry for help fell on deaf ears since the government held a belief that the cry was as a result of laziness rather than genuine need.
The government cited overhunting in northern Quebec as another reason for the relocation of the Inuit. Though valid due to the increasing population and need for more space for sustenance, evidence points that the families were coerced to relocate and were constantly denied a chance to move back into their original region, Nunavik. The communities were promised welfare support and better living and hunting environment. In actual sense, the high arctic had poorer weather than the Northern Quebec region. They had to adjust to weather extremities of 24 hours of day during the summer and 24 hours of night during winter. This was amidst a promise that those who did not wish to stay would be brought back. The government did not honor the pledge. The resettlement exercise acted as a government experiment seeking to establish whether the Inuit from Northern Quebec could survive the higher Northern Arctic extremities better than other Inuit communities (Henderson, 2007).
The other motivation by the government was to protect the Inuit from wage economy and welfare dependency. This is partly because the communities lacked necessary skills to participate in the Canadian job market. Although this appeared genuine, the main reason was the need to open up north to the non-renewable resource development as well as encourage other northern people to enter wage job market. This can appear as an ill-conceived measure by the government. During this time, the population could be considered as a handful compared to other regions in Canada. Owing to their subsistence lifestyle, the government could have done better by relocating the people to nearby regions. In order to aggravate the relocation, the federal government at one point employed unsound tactics which involved mass killing of dogs. The dogs formed a primary source of livelihood for the Inuit people. The act involved the RCMP officers who gave vague reasons for their actions. The slaughtering of dogs was done as a punitive measure aimed at forced culture assimilation. This exercise also points out at outright paternalism (Henderson, 2007).
Following the injusti...