Guam and Archipelagic American Studies

Islands are often associated with distinct cultures. Although the island polities that formed during the withdrawal of empire frequently brought together various ethnicities, Indigenous governance and claims to cultural distinction have often remained an ideal for such islands and archipelagos. This paper examines the complex causality behind associations between indigeneity and islandness, discussing how island spatiality fosters: (1) cultural distinction, (2) connections between people and place, and (3) Indigenous territory. We argue that islands are exceptionally fruitful spaces for developing and maintaining distinct ethnicities, due not just to material effects of island geography but also in the manner in which both islanders and mainlanders conceptualise islands as “legible geographies.” Islands can thereby become quintessential spaces for containing Indigenous Peoples, simultaneously sustaining cultural difference while limiting the scope for Indigenous self‐determination. Drawing on cases from the Arctic, East Asia, Oceania and the Caribbean, we highlight the benefits that island spatiality can offer to Indigenous communities as well as the dangerous manner in which island spatiality can encourage essentialisations of Indigenous Peoples and circumscriptions of Indigenous spaces. This paper positions itself as an effort in decolonial island studies.

show abstract

Indigenous environmental perspectives: Challenging the oceanic security state

Na’puti

Frain

2023

Security Dialogue

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article centers Indigenous epistemologies to critique the United States oceanic security state, a modality of militarization and blue-washing conservation that extends beyond land borders to encompass federal conceptualizations of national security throughout the Pacific Ocean. Beginning with Indigenous perspectives from Oceania, it provides examples of Indigenous peoples’ continuing connections to ocean spaces and challenges to United States colonial geographic imaginaries and militarized destruction. Then, advancing the concept of the oceanic security state, it examines how United States assertions of sovereignty over Oceania are used to justify hyper-militarization while simultaneously destroying the environment and contributing to the climate crisis. These phenomena occur while the USA remains exempt from federal environmental conservation laws through ‘blue-washing’, and the United States government benefits from the exclusion of military emission data within international climate targets. The findings reveal how militarizing all ocean space in the name of United States national security operates within delineated borders of Exclusive Economic Zones, Marine National Monuments, and Marine Protected Areas. Guided by Indigenous epistemologies, the article concludes with alternative ways of understanding ocean spaces and constructing futures of genuine security.

show abstract

Guam and Archipelagic American Studies

Abstract: the proj ect has benefi ted from Brian's association with two research groups and numerous colleagues. Early on, the American Modernity Research Group workshopped a proj ect overview/proposal, where we received valuable feedback from

Cited by 13 publications

References 12 publications

Craig Santos Perez’s Poetics of multispecies kinship: Challenging militarism and extinction in the Pacific

Craig Santos Perez’s Poetics of multispecies kinship: Challenging militarism and extinction in the Pacific

Islands of indigeneity: Cultural distinction, indigenous territory and island spatiality

Indigenous environmental perspectives: Challenging the oceanic security state

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About