This chapter addresses tribal institutions regarding self-governance, tribal governance trust and distrust, as well as the duality of institutions in Navajo Nation. Not allconcepts discussed during this chapter will explicitly relate to COVID-19 and the global pandemic. However, this chapter provides an inclusive understanding of tribal governance and perspective, as well as how tribal institutions used the pandemic to express autonomy, build tribal institutional trust, and work within the US institutions. The principle of Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC) is also used as a connection between the following
sub-sections. As discussed in the theoretical framework chapter, this global theme gives agency to Indigenous populations regarding governance, land, and decision-making (Hanna & Vanclay, 2013).
7.a Tribal Self-governance and Autonomy
Media Analysis
Governance in relation to the pandemic was frequently covered in all news organizations analyzed.
Roughly two thirds of the articles in the analysis include topics related to the federal government, tribal government, or both. However, tribal governance structure and elections were not mentioned nearly as often as the US government in articles about Navajo Nation. Coverage of the Navajo Nation tribal governance system was primarily in conjunction with the health orders and executive orders put into place due to the coronavirus (Fonseca, 2020, December 3). The Associated Press included this in a piece centered on the healthcare experience,
Restrictions also included the tribal council swiftly shutting down sacred lands, setting up Navajo police checkpoints, and limiting off-reservation travel (Burnett, 2020, November 19). Navajo police also monitored residents to ensure everyone was following the curfew guidelines; breaking of curfew could result in a $1,000 fine or 30 days in jail (Romero, 2020, April 9). Navajo Nation also chose to keep their economy shut while all surrounding US states reopened (Bennett, 2020, May 27). Little pushback was given by residents in response to these measures, as communities understood the importance of what was at risk (Burnett, 2020, November 19). Navajo law understands the Navajo way of life, which was reflected in the understanding of community agreement to collectively abide by lockdown measures (ibid.). Tribal autonomy enabled Navajo Nation to act alone and act quickly in response to the pandemic by spending millions of tribal dollars that were not originally allocated for a pandemic while waiting for action from the federal government (Walker, 2020, September 29).
Other mentions of tribal autonomy in the media were regarding vaccine clinical trials, vaccine prioritization, and vaccine distribution. In an article published by CNN, Bohlen is quoted,
59 Due to the Navajo tribe’s autonomy, they were able to set up their own vaccination campaign, that outpaced most US states. As a response to the pandemic, it is also being discussed for tribes to gain more autonomy of their healthcare system by changing IHS facilities to 638 facilities under the ISDEAA of 1975 (as discussed in the introduction and contextual chapters) (ibid.).
Tribal criminal justice matters, and tribal self-governance will be discussed in the following paragraphs.
Neither are explicitly related to COVID-19 but provide a more holistic view of tribal institutions and goals. Criminal justice and self-governance were brought up during the global pandemic, as the
unprecedented modern health crisis provided a unique opportunity for goals and agendas to be pushed.
Legitimacy and expansion of tribal institutions and governance was also discussed in relation to criminal justice. Reaffirming tribal sovereignty and tribal institutions by ensuring tribal courts handle all cases that occur on tribal land, as well as in cases that involve a tribal victim or perpetrator (Fonseca, 2020, August 27). Tribal law understands the way of life and is better suited to internally handle criminal justice matters (ibid.). This was also brought up during an interview, highlighting the importance of tribal institutional legitimacy in all faucets of governance, not just health and infrastructure (Interview 9, personal communication, March 16, 2021).
Media outlets also covered tribal involvement to US political participation and the importance of being counted in the US census, which decides the number of congressional seats per state as well as allocates
$1.5 trillion of US federal spending (Tensley, 2020, October 11). Media publications included that Navajo Nation President Nez supports President Biden’s tribal policy, as it will increase Indigenous decision-making pertaining to public lands (Becenti, 2020, November 7). Statements of confidence were expressed for the Biden-Harris administration to strengthen tribal autonomy, for example,
Interview Analysis
A difference found in interviews pertaining to tribal governance was the conveyed level of importance and involvement. Tribal elections are of high significance on Navajo Nation. Parades are held,
constituents speak directly to candidates, and the level of participation is high (Interview 1, personal communication, January 23, 2021). The autonomy of the Navajo tribal government was viewed in a positive way, especially in relation to the pandemic and the rules that were put in place, separate from the US (Interview 7, personal communication, March 10, 2021). The strict lockdown, vaccination
60 distribution, and the ability for Navajo Nation to govern their own people are all points of agreement among the Native participants. The organization of tribal leaders being the spokespeople to the tribe, the media, and the US heeded a consistent message. Other positive sentiments reflected the upside of tribal run hospitals and the ability to have more ‘leeway’ than IHS facilities (Interview 8, personal communication, March 16, 2021).
The more difficult aspects when speaking on tribal autonomy included the bureaucratic hurdles when changing from US management to tribal management (ibid.), having autonomy without funding, and the multiple governing bodies that the Navajo tribal government has to stay in close communication with for the best outcomes (Interview 9, personal communication, March 16, 2021). The connection between tribal autonomy and the power of territory was also prevalent.
Social Media (Facebook) Analysis
Many comments posted on the Facebook video implied the power and legitimacy in decision-making that the Navajo Nation tribal leaders held. This was typically included in comments on who should be selected to receive the vaccine, giving power to tribal autonomy. Expectations and requests of direct responses from President Nez were also common (January 31, 2021).
Final Thoughts
The ability to express Navajo agency is intertwined with the legitimacy and recognition of tribal
institutions. Navajo Nation expresses autonomy through tribal law, culture, resources, and protection of land and its people. Tribal governance and autonomy were expressed on a much more individual level during interviews. Each participant had a personal connection to tribal governance, more so than what was expressed in media publications. The decentralized government structure in Navajo Nation is different than the central structure of the US. When Navajo people reach out to representatives, they expect a personal and direct response from leadership. This personal connection to tribal institutions grew during the time of the global health pandemic, as constituents relied on tribal leadership for guidance and protection. The assumption of tribal self-determination provided within the framework of FPIC helped legitimize the Navajo health orders put in place.
61
7.b Trust in Navajo Governance
Media Analysis
A consistent message in the media encompassed a sense of trust that Navajo people felt towards their tribal government, as well as trust in Indigenous leadership in the US federal government. These sentiments were typically associated with the democratic party. Trust was built during the pandemic by a consistent, inclusive, unified, and tailored messaging approach at the start of the pandemic (Krisst, 2021, March 9). Multiple platforms that are popular in Navajo Nation were used to share information, like Facebook, radio, and Instagram. The Navajo language was also included in virus messaging, increasing trust among elders and Navajo language speakers (ibid.). Frequent virtual town halls
conducted by the tribal leaders had guests like Dr. Anthony Fauci to explain how to take precautions to prevent infection (Kaur, 2021, February 26). Media pieces presented this information in a positive light, as Navajo Nation was applauded for their strict adherence to the executive orders and public health orders (Wilder, 2020, December 3).
Further trust was built surrounding the information provided about the vaccine. Dr. Loretta Christensen provided a quote to Navajo Times stating, “Honesty and transparency, developing that trust with the people you are serving is vital. We have spent a great deal of time on the relationship with our Navajo people to encourage them to be vaccinated,” (Krisst, 2021, March 9). President Nez received his
vaccination on television, and vaccine information was culturally relevant. By the end of February 2021, three fourths of Navajo people wanted the vaccine (Kaur, 2021, February 26). Mass weekend
vaccination events were held to accommodate the high demand for Navajos to receive their free vaccine.
Interview Analysis
Topics covered in the interviews differed from media coverage regarding trust in the tribal council and tribally run facilities. 638 hospitals were historically viewed as poor health facilities to work at. In the past, doctors who had issues with their medical license could practice medicine on a reservation (Interview 8, personal communication, March 16, 2021). However, 638 hospitals are now fully staffed and considered a desirable place to work (ibid.), which was not covered in the media. The pandemic also created more connections and more frequent communication between tribal healthcare and US
government healthcare (ibid.).
Similarities in the interviews and the media echoed the trust gained by the consistent, bilingual, and multi-platform messaging during the pandemic and vaccination campaign. The proactivity of the health mandates put in place along with the unified, culturally relevant messaging helped build trust (Interview 9, personal communication, March 16, 2021). The use of understanding and knowledge of localized politics helped convince more traditional tribal members to abide by the restrictions (ibid.).
Social Media (Facebook) Analysis
The interwoven connection between trust and communication persisted in the social media analysis.
Multiple people replied to questions reminding community members that the vaccination event was
62 advertised on Facebook and the local radio. Others made statements that they were ‘in good hands’.
One post says, “Down to earth. And a committed President to his people. Thank you Sir. God Bless You for what you are doing,” clearly showing admiration and legitimacy of the tribal leader (January 31, 2021).
Final Thoughts
All three data sets reflected trust and positive feelings towards the Navajo tribal government. Interviews went more in-depth regarding lived experiences and changing stereotypes about tribally run health facilities, as well as the connections made across institutional barriers because of the pandemic. Navajo people were thankful for tribal autonomy and tribal territory during the pandemic. Trust was built through communication and swift decision-making from Navajo leadership. FPIC provides legitimacy as well as a more holistic understanding of tribal trust, especially for a non-Indigenous perspective.
7.c Distrust in Navajo Governance
Media Analysis
Although far fewer quotes were attributed to this sub-section, there were mentions of disapproval towards the Navajo tribal council in the media. Quotes were rooted in historical misuse of tribal funds by previous leaders and the disapproval of the current Navajo Nation Republican Vice President (VP), Myron Lizer. A piece published in the Associated Press expressed this sentiment,
Frustration was also expressed for the lack of economic opportunities to financially support themselves on the reservation and a lack of infrastructure. A quote from a CNN publication states, “It’s devasting to see our people being impacted not only by this pandemic, but by the lack of infrastructure, which doesn’t allow us a chance to even support ourselves,” (Jeneda Banally as cited in Chinn, 2021, January 2). Coverage of previous Navajo Chairman and the misuse of tribal funds were also included in two articles of the media analysis.
Interview Analysis
The media covered much more on the topic of distrust towards the tribal government in the Navajo community than what was expressed during the interviews. The only theme duplicated was the distrust of the current VP of Navajo Nation, Myron Lizer, and his support of Trump. This was viewed as a tribal leader not wanting to help his own community, as the Trump administration was not providing monetary assistance (Interview 9, personal communication, March 16, 2021).
63 Social Media (Facebook) Analysis
One qualm put forward in the comment section of the Facebook video analyzed dealt with tracking where the money was going and who was getting paid from the coronavirus assistance fund. “I would love for President Nez to look out for us [teachers] too because people want their kids back in place…
Tribal employees get theirs but I hear that even paramedics are left out to [sic]! How inconsiderate and greedy people get when they see money…” (January 31, 2021). Other comments included disapproval for the structure and organization of the event, along with disagreement on who is being prioritized for vaccination (ibid.). However, this was a small margin of the overall comments.
Final Thoughts
The media and social media analysis presented issues that Navajo members have with the tribal government. However, in the scheme of quotations and data used, this was minimal compared to the theme of trust for the Navajo council. Both sides exist and are important to note, but necessary to distinguish that the feelings of distrust were primarily from outliers. For the media analysis, distrust was rooted in historical wrong-doings and the present-day Republican party. Interview data reflected distrust of the US Republican party. FPIC views Indigenous rights from a global view, where the US Republican party aligns with individualism. These two conflicting worldviews provides explanations of distrust towards Republicans and distrust towards previous Navajo leaders who did not make decisions with the Navajo community in mind.
7.d Duality
Media Analysis
This section dives into the duality presented through institutional relations between tribal governance and US structures. Duality is present in every culture; however, Navajo culture is particularly complex due to the history, dual governments, dual laws, dual cultures, and dual identities that surround Navajo Nation. Institutional and personal levels of duality will be discussed in this section.
An important point published on this was regarding the vaccine and modern medicine. In an article published in the Associated Press by Felicia Fonseca,
The dire need to protect themselves and their elders was at a multifaceted cost. On the other side of the coin, some Navajo residents were thrilled to be a part of the vaccine clinical trials, “’We were hoping a
64 vaccine would come out because of all of the deaths that were occurring,’ said Arvena, ‘We wanted to see something happen. We automatically said, sign us up, we’re ready!’” (Krisst, 2020, December 17).
Several articles mentioned the importance of learning and teaching young people the Navajo language, returning to Native roots, and the importance of cultural lands (Krisst, 2021, January 14). In contrast, other articles mentioned the abandonment of language, culture, poor education, and the difficulties of trying to balance life within the US institutions (“Letters: We, the people”, 2020, November 19). Navajo people belong to the Navajo Nation, as well as citizens of the US. Media articles used the term ‘first Americans’ to describe Indigenous people (Becenti, 2020, November 7), while commenting that the US does not ‘help their own’, referring to the poor conditions on the reservation (“Letters: We, the people”, 2020, November 19).
Feeling a sense of power and belonging within Native territory, but not in border towns or US territory portrays the sense of dual citizenship, dual cultures, and dual institutions present in daily life. The delicate dance between living between two cultures is exemplified in a quote from the Navajo Times,
Other tensions heavily covered in the media included Natives and US politics. Emphasis on Democratic candidates winning was portrayed as Indigenous people having a seat at the table, as it is believed the Biden-Harris administration will give Indigenous people more say in tribal and land decisions (“Letters:
We, the people”, 2020, November 19). The expectation that Biden will extend coronavirus assistance, improve infrastructure, schools, healthcare, provide renewable energy, and protect sacred lands was presented through media, as he partially owes his win to Native voters (ibid.). These improvements also come with the assumption that they will provide economic opportunity for Navajo people. With strong ties to the US democratic party, Deb Haaland was also heavily covered. She is portrayed as a powerful, democratic, champion of Native country that operates within the centrist institution of the US
government (Utacia Krol, 2020, December 19). “She [Deb Haaland] is a powerful warrior in the best sense of the word, with generations of wisdom and connection to the land she’ll be in charge of
protecting and serving,” Deborah Miranda stated in an Arizona Republic article (ibid.). Native people feel a sense of power and representation in their ability to identify and see themselves with Deb Haaland, furthering legitimizing the power of US institutions. The duality of expectations is furthered explored in a New York Times article, “But Ms. Haaland will need to calibrate a delicate balance between her populist identity as a champion of Native rights and tribal sovereignty and her new role defending the interests of the federal system,” (Lawrence, 2020, December 29).
A few articles also covered the presence of Republican support, although this was not present in the other data sets. The sitting VP of Navajo Nation, Myron Lizer, who is a Republican and Trump supporter, provided quotes to multiple news outlets. As quoted in an Associated Press article, “I’m finding that
65 we’re giving the Navajo Republican voters confidence in coming out and showing their support,”
(Fonseca & Lee, 2020, October 24). Later in the article, Mullin, one of two Native representatives in US congress, stated, “Native country is not blue, it’s purple…And before long, it’s going to be red,” (ibid.).
Little coverage was provided to tribal governance and tribal elections, even though voting was held on the same day as the US election. Media agencies prioritized US governance over tribal governance coverage, further legitimizing the importance of US institutions over tribal institutions, which complicates the duality of Navajo lived experience.
Interview Analysis
Speaking with both Navajo and non-Indigenous people working on the reservation, as well as Navajo people living in Arizona, multiple perspectives were given. Ideas about duality came in the form of discussing voting rights and politics, serving in the US military, citizenship, the ability to speak the Navajo language, physical appearance in tribal leadership, and education. Navajo people have two sets of laws, two sets of rights, and two cultures to abide by (Interview 3, personal communication, February 8, 2021). Within these two systems, concerns were expressed of being Navajo and operating with US institutions. The education system teaching Native children indoctrinates a false American narrative – one that does not confront the genocidal truth of the past (Interview 7, personal communication, March 10, 2021). Operating within the US education system is conflictive and problematic. Trying to participate in US elections has become increasingly difficult with the lack of funding to the US Post Office, while desire to participate is rising (ibid.).
Speaking Navajo was also a point of contention. Two Navajo participants, both living and working on Navajo Nation spoke to how not speaking the traditional language impacted their lives and work.
Interviewee 1 expressed discomfiture when talking about the inability to speak the traditional language, while Interviewee 9 stated he always has a translator with him while working. The expectation to know both English and Navajo is tied to connection to the community and tribal institutions. Appearance and where you were raised also plays a role, especially within tribal leadership (Interview 9, personal communication, March 16, 2021). A Navajo councilman interview participant stated,
Social Media (Facebook) Analysis Duality was not present in this data set.
66 Final Thoughts
The duality presented in the media was different than what was spoken to during the interviews. The media focused on the nuances pertaining to the vaccination trials and Navajo Republicans, and the interviews focused more on inclusion within the Navajo community and the US institutions. The want to be properly funded, counted, and fully included in the US institutions, as well as hold agency in the decision-making process aligns with the principle of FPIC. This global assumption that Indigenous people have a right to ancestral land and resources was spoken to during personal accounts when discussing the tribal government. FPIC was also alluded to in the media through Deb Haaland’s appointment and the Biden-Harris administration providing a space for Indigenous authority and decision-making. FPIC is a global, collective-based principle, but US institutions are built with individualistic roots. Navajo culture is rooted in collectiveness and kin. Navajo institutions navigate between US structures and assumptions of tribal self-determination. This duality was further exposed during the pandemic, legitimizing and acknowledging tribal autonomy from a non-Indigenous perspective, while building tribal trust from an Indigenous perspective.
67