Diplomacy as Self-representation: British Columbia’s First Nations and China
In: The Hague Journal of DiplomacySearch for other papers by Jean Michel Montsion in
Current site
Google Scholar
China’s recent interest and substantial investments in Canada’s natural resource sector have led some First Nations in British Columbia to undertake diplomatic activities to represent their interests to Chinese officials and investors. This article explores the interplay developing between the diplomatic activities of British Columbia’s First Nations and those of the Canadian state in the area of natural resource promotion. It does so by examining the diplomatic efforts of British Columbia’s First Nations Energy and Mining Council and the Canadian government’s Foreign Investment Promotion and Protection Agreement with China. The article argues that this interplay represents a struggle over diplomatic representation, in which British Columbia’s First Nations challenge the Canadian state’s monopoly on the representation of indigenous interests abroad, whereas the Canadian state constantly reframes indigenous perspectives on international affairs as a matter of domestic jurisdiction, in order to re-ground its control over Canadian foreign diplomatic practices.
Purchase
Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
Institutional Login
Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials
Personal login
Log in with your brill.com account
-
2
See, for example, Bethany Haalboom, ‘The Intersection of Corporate Social Responsibility Guidelines and Indigenous Rights: Examining Neoliberal Governance of a Proposed Mining Project in Suriname’, Geoforum, vol. 43, no. 5 (2012), pp. 969–979; and Ciaran O’Faircheallaigh, ‘Extractive Industries and Indigenous Peoples: A Changing Dynamic?’, Journal of Rural Studies, vol. 30, no. 13 (2013), pp. 20–30.
-
3
Jean Michel Montsion, ‘Disrupting Canadian Sovereignty? The “First Nations and China” Strategy Revisited’, Geoforum, vol. 58, no. 1 (2015), pp. 114–121.
-
5
Donna Lee and David Hudson, ‘The Old and New Significance of Political Economy in Diplomacy’, Review of International Studies, vol. 30 (2004), pp. 343–360.
-
6
Evan Potter, ‘Branding Canada: The Renaissance of Commercial Diplomacy’, International Studies Perspectives, vol. 5 (2004), pp. 56–58.
-
8
Beier and Wylie, Canadian Foreign Policy in Critical Perspective, p. xviii.
-
9
Mary Young and Susan Henders, ‘Other Diplomacies and the Making of Canada–Asia Relations’, Canadian Foreign Policy Journal, vol. 18, no. 3 (2012), p. 377.
-
10
Marshall Beier, ‘Introduction: Indigenous Diplomacies’, Canadian Foreign Policy Journal, vol. 13, no. 3 (2007), p. 9.
-
13
Ravi de Costa, ‘Cosmology, Mobility and Exchange: Indigenous Diplomacies Before the Nation-State’, Canadian Foreign Policy Journal, vol. 13, no. 3 (2007), pp. 13–19; and Laura Parisi and Jeff Corntassel, ‘In Pursuit of Self-Determination: Indigenous Women’s Challenges to Traditional Diplomatic Spaces’, Canadian Foreign Policy Journal, vol. 13, no. 3 (2007), pp. 81–98.
-
14
Jodi A. Byrd and Katharina C. Heyer, ‘Introduction: International Discourses of Indigenous Rights and Responsibilities’, Alternatives, vol. 33 (2008), pp. 1–51; P. Whitney Lackenbauer and Andrew F. Cooper, ‘The Achilles Heel of Canadian International Citizenship: Indigenous Diplomacies and State Responses’, Canadian Foreign Policy Journal, vol. 13, no. 3 (2007), pp. 105–110; and Paul Nadasdy, ‘Boundaries among Kin: Sovereignty, the Modern Treaty Process and the Rise of Ethno-Territorial Nationalism among Yukon First Nations’, Comparative Studies in Society and History, vol. 54, no. 3 (2012), p. 529.
-
18
Carole Blackburn, ‘Differentiating Indigenous Citizenship’, pp. 69–70 and 73; and Shaw, Indigeneity and Political Theory, pp. 123–129.
-
19
Alfred, ‘Sovereignty’, pp. 466–467; and Montsion, ‘Disrupting Canadian Sovereignty?’, pp. 114–115.
-
22
June McCue, ‘New Modalities of Sovereignty: An Indigenous Perspective’, Intercultural Human Rights Law Review, vol. 19 (2007), pp. 25–28; and Thom, ‘The Paradox of Boundaries in Coast Salish Territories’, p. 180.
-
26
Blackburn, ‘Differentiating Indigenous Citizenship’, p. 70; and Thom, ‘The Paradox of Boundaries in Coast Salish Territories’, p. 179.
-
28
Lackenbauer and Cooper, ‘The Achilles Heel of Canadian International Citizenship’, p. 108.
-
29
McCue, ‘New Modalities of Sovereignty’, pp. 20–21; Nadasdy, ‘Boundaries among Kin’, p. 500; and Thom, ‘The Paradox of Boundaries in Coast Salish Territories’, p. 189.
-
31
Geoffrey Hale, ‘In Pursuit of Leverage: The Evolution of Canadian Trade and Investment Policies in an Increasingly Multipolar World’, Canadian Foreign Policy Journal, vol. 18, no. 1 (2012), pp. 110–115; and Potter, ‘Branding Canada’, p. 58.
-
51
Supreme Court of Canada, Haida Nation v. British Columbia (Minister of Forests), 2004 scc 73 (18 November 2004), available online at http://csc.lexum.org/decisia-scc-csc/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/2189/index.do (last accessed 22 November 2013); Supreme Court of Canada, Taku River Tlingit First Nation v. British Columbia (Project Assessment Director), 2004 scc 74 (18 November 2004), available online at http://scc.lexum.org/decisia-scc-csc/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/2190/index.do (last accessed 22 November 2013); and Supreme Court of Canada, Mikisew Cree First Nation v. Canada (Minister of Canadian Heritage), 2005 scc 69 (24 November 2005), available online at http://csc.lexum.org/decisia-scc-csc/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/2251/index.do (last accessed 22 November 2013).
Diplomacy as Self-representation: British Columbia’s First Nations and China
In: The Hague Journal of DiplomacySearch for other papers by Jean Michel Montsion in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
China’s recent interest and substantial investments in Canada’s natural resource sector have led some First Nations in British Columbia to undertake diplomatic activities to represent their interests to Chinese officials and investors. This article explores the interplay developing between the diplomatic activities of British Columbia’s First Nations and those of the Canadian state in the area of natural resource promotion. It does so by examining the diplomatic efforts of British Columbia’s First Nations Energy and Mining Council and the Canadian government’s Foreign Investment Promotion and Protection Agreement with China. The article argues that this interplay represents a struggle over diplomatic representation, in which British Columbia’s First Nations challenge the Canadian state’s monopoly on the representation of indigenous interests abroad, whereas the Canadian state constantly reframes indigenous perspectives on international affairs as a matter of domestic jurisdiction, in order to re-ground its control over Canadian foreign diplomatic practices.