Oil, Contact, and Conservation inthe Amazon: IndigenousHuaorani, Chevron, and YasuniJudith Kimerling TABLE OF CONTENTSI. INTRODUCTION . 44II. OIL BOOM . 46III. NATIONAL INTEGRATION AND LAND RIGHTS . 47IV. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION IN THE OIL PATCH . 57V. LITIGATION IN TEXACO’S HOMELAND . 63VI. THE LAGO AGRIO LITIGATION . 72VII. THE INTANGIBLE ZONE AND CONSERVATION IN YASUNI . 98VIII. CONCLUSION . 113 Professor of Environmental Law and Policy, Department of Political Science andEnvironmental Studies Program, The City University of New York (“CUNY”), QueensCollege; J.D., Yale Law School, 1982; B.A., University of Michigan, 1978. The authorhas worked on issues discussed in this Article in various capacities since 1989 andcurrently works with the grassroots Huaorani alliance Ome Gompote KiwigimoniHuaorani (We Defend Our Huaorani Territory), also known as “Ome Yasuni.” In 2012,she was retained by a group of Huaorani to help protect their interests in the Aguinda v.ChevronTexaco litigation, discussed infra.

44Colo. J. Int’l Envtl. L. & Pol’y[Vol. 24:1I. INTRODUCTIONThe Huaorani (Waorani) are hunters and gatherers who have livedin the Amazon Rainforest since before written history. Their ancestrallands span some 20,000 square kilometers and include the area nowknown as Yasuni National Park and Biosphere Reserve in the Republicof Ecuador. Yasuni is world-renowned for carbon rich forests andextraordinary biological diversity and is an important refuge for freshwater dolphins, harpy eagles, black caimans, and other threatened speciesand regional endemics. The Huaorani are legendary, even among otherIndigenous peoples in Ecuador’s Amazon region, for their knowledgeabout the “giving”1 rainforest and its plant and animal life. They are alsorenowned for their warriors, and long hardwood spears and blowguns.In Ecuador, the Huaorani are also known as “Aucas,” a term thatmeans “savages” and is considered deeply insulting by the Huaorani.Their name for themselves, Huaorani, means humanos (humans, orpeople). They refer to outsiders as cowode, which means desconocidos(strangers). For centuries, Huaorani warriors defended their territoryfrom intrusions by cowode who sought to exploit the Amazon andconquer its inhabitants. They were the only known tribe in Ecuador tosurvive the rubber extraction boom—which ended around 1920—as “afree people.” In 1956, the Huaorani became world famous for spearing todeath five North American evangelical missionaries from the U.S.-basedSummer Institute of Linguistics and Wycliffe Bible Translators(“SIL/WBT”),2 who were trying to make “contact” with them.3 The firstpeaceful, sustained contacts between Huaorani and outsiders were in1958, when SIL/WBT missionaries convinced Dayuma, a Huaoraniwoman who was living as a slave on a hacienda near Huaorani territory,to return to the forest where she had lived as a child and help themissionary-linguists relocate her relatives into a permanent settlement,1. The term “giving” is borrowed from Laura Rival, The Growth of Family Trees:Understanding Huaorani Perceptions of the Forest, 28 MAN 635 (1993) (describing therelationship of the Huaorani with their “giving environment”), and Huaorani who live inYasuni, and say that their rainforest territory Ome “gives us everything” and “gives uslife and our way of life.”2. For an analysis of the relationship between Summer Institute of Linguistics andWycliffe Bible Translators, which includes a critique of their work with the Huaorani, seeDAVID STOLL, FISHERS OF MEN OR FOUNDERS OF EMPIRE? THE WYCLIFFE BIBLETRANSLATORS IN LATIN AMERICA (1982).3. See, e.g., ‘Go Ye and Preach the Gospel’: Five Do and Die, LIFE MAG., Jan. 30,1956; ELISABETH ELLIOT, THROUGH GATES OF SPLENDOR (1957) (account of SIL/WBT’s“Operation Auca,” written by the widow of one of the slain missionaries).

2013]Oil, Contact, and Conservation in the Amazon45teach them to live as Christians, and translate the Bible into their nativetongue.4In 1967, a consortium of foreign companies—wholly-ownedsubsidiaries of Texaco and Gulf, both now part of Chevron—struck oil inEcuador’s Amazon region, near Huaorani territory. The discovery washeralded as the salvation of Ecuador’s economy, the product that wouldpull the nation out of chronic poverty and “underdevelopment” at last. Atthe time, the national economy was centered on the production andexport of bananas.5Oil exports began in 1972, after Texaco Petroleum, the operator ofthe consortium, completed construction of a 313-mile pipeline totransport crude oil out of the remote Amazon region across the AndesMountains to the Pacific coast. The “first barrel” of Amazon Crude wasparaded through the streets of the capital, Quito, like a hero. Peoplecould get drops of crude to commemorate the occasion and after theparade, the oil drum was placed on an alter-like structure at the EloyAlfaro Military Academy.6But the reality of oil development turned out to be far morecomplex than its triumphalist launch. For the Huaorani, the arrival ofTexaco’s work crews meant destruction rather than progress. Theirhomelands were invaded and degraded by outsiders with unrelentingtechnological, military, and economic power. The first outsiders camefrom the sky; over time, they dramatically transformed natural and socialenvironments. Their territory reduced and world changed forever, theHuaorani have borne the costs of oil development without sharing in itsbenefits or participating in a meaningful way in political andenvironmental decisions that affect them. Today, Huaorani who still livein their ancestral lands in Yasuni are organizing to defend theirremaining lands, way of life, and self-determination. In addition toencroachments by oil companies and settlers, they face a new threat:4. See ETHEL EMILY WALLIS, THE DAYUMA STORY: LIFE UNDER THE AUCA SPEARS(1971); ELISABETH ELLIOT, THE SAVAGE MY KINSMAN (1996); STOLL, supra note 2;Judith Kimerling, Dislocation, Evangelization, and Contamination: Amazon Crude andthe Huaorani People, in ETHNIC CONFLICT AND GOVERNANCE IN COMPARATIVEPERSPECTIVE 70 (Woodrow Wilson Int’l Ctr. for Scholars, Working Paper Series, No.215, 1995).5. The other principal exports were cocoa and coffee. JOHN D. MARTZ, POLITICSAND PETROLEUM IN ECUADOR 122, 157 (1987).6. Interview with Mariana Acosta, Executive Director, Foundation Images for aNew World, in Quito, Ecuador (Mar. 3, 1994).

46Colo. J. Int’l Envtl. L. & Pol’y[Vol. 24:1conservation organizations and bureaucracies that seek to manage Yasuniand govern the Huaorani.II. OIL BOOM7Texaco’s discovery of commercially valuable oil sparked an oil rushand petroleum quickly came to dominate Ecuador’s economy. Thecompany named the first commercial field Lago Agrio, after an earlyTexaco gusher in Sour Lake, Texas; erected a one-thousand barrel perday refinery that had been prefabricated in the United States; andexpanded exploration and production deeper into the rainforest.8Production rose to more than two-hundred thousand barrels per day bythe end of 1973 and that same year, government income quadrupled.9Initially, the oil boom stimulated nationalist sentiments in petroleumpolicy makers. The government claimed state ownership of oil resources,created a state oil company (Corporación Estatal Petrolera Ecuatoriana(“CEPE”), now Petroecuador), acquired ownership interests in theconsortium that developed the fields, raised taxes, and demandedinvestments in infrastructure.Before long, however, government officials learned that they haveless power than commonly believed. Although relations betweenEcuador and Texaco and other oil companies have not been static, at thecore of those relationships lies an enduring political reality. Since the oilboom began, successive governments have linked national developmentplans and economic policy with petroleum, and the health of the oilindustry has become a central concern for the State. At the same time,because oil is a nonrenewable resource, levels of production—andrevenues—cannot be sustained without ongoing operations to find anddevelop new reserves, activities that are capital intensive and technologydriven. Oil development has accentuated Ecuador’s dependence onexport markets and foreign investment, technology, and expertise ratherthan providing the answer to Ecuador’s development aspirations.When confronted with the realities of governance and oil politics,governments in Ecuador have vacillated over the extent to whichpetroleum policy should accommodate the interests of foreign oil7. For citations and a fuller discussion, see Judith Kimerling, Indigenous Peoplesand the Oil Frontier in Amazonia: The Case of Ecuador, ChevronTexaco, and Aguinda v.Texaco, 38 N.Y.U. J. INT’L L. & POL. 413 (2006); see also MARTZ, supra note 5.8. JUDITH KIMERLING, AMAZON CRUDE (1991).9. MARTZ, supra note 5, at 4.

2013]Oil, Contact, and Conservation in the Amazon47companies or be nationalistic in outlook. Alarm over forecasts of thedepletion of productive reserves has become a recurring theme inpetroleum politics, as have the twin policy goals of expanded reservesand renewed exploration, and the corollary need to reform laws andpolicies to make the nation more attractive to foreign investors. Thefocus on economic and national development issues has eclipsedenvironmental and human rights concerns. Even the more nationalisticand populist policy makers have prioritized the need to promote oilextraction, and generally endeavored to maximize the State’s share ofrevenues and participation in oil development, while disregardingenvironmental protection and the rights of the Huaorani and otheraffected Indigenous peoples.The initial bonanza and easy money from Texaco’s early finds wererelatively short-lived, and just five years after production began, “a floodof foreign borrowing” was needed to sustain economic growth.10Ecuador has been able to secure large loans for its size because of its oilreserves and has accumulated a staggering foreign debt. At the sametime, the benefits of oil development have not been well distributed.Income inequality and the percentage of Ecuadorians living in povertyremains stubbornly high.III. NATIONAL INTEGRATION AND LAND RIGHTSWhen the oil rush began, Ecuador’s institutions had very littleinfluence in the Amazon. The Huaorani who lived in the areas whereTexaco wanted to operate were free and sovereign, living in voluntaryisolation in the forest. The discovery of black gold made the conquest ofAmazonia, and pacification of the Huaorani, a national imperative. Italso provided infrastructure to penetrate remote, previously inaccessibleareas and monies to support the military and bureaucracy. Ecuadorlaunched a national integration policy to incorporate the Amazon regioninto the nation’s economy and assimilate its native peoples into thedominant national culture. Successive governments have viewed theAmazon as a frontier to be conquered, a source of wealth for the State,and an escape valve for land distribution pressures in the highland andcoastal regions.The government aggressively promoted internal colonization andoffered land titles and easy credit to settlers who migrated to the10. Id. at 207–08.

48Colo. J. Int’l Envtl. L. & Pol’y[Vol. 24:1Amazon, cleared the forest, and planted crops or pasture, even thoughmost soils in the region are not well-suited to livestock or mono-cropproduction.11 Government officials pledged to civilize the Huaorani andother Amazonian peoples.12On a visit to the Amazon in 1972, Ecuador’s President, GeneralRodriguez Lara, rebuffed an appeal from a neighboring tribe for formalrecognition of Indigenous peoples in the government’s new developmentpolicies and protection of their lands from settlers. The President Generalsaid that all Ecuadorians are “part Indian,” with the blood of the Inca,Atahualpa, and insisted that he, too, was “part Indian,” although he didnot know where he had acquired his “Indian” blood. “There is no moreIndian problem,” he proclaimed, “we all become white when we acceptthe goals of the national culture.”13 Within ten days, the President’sdeclaration of national ethnic homogeneity was codified by executivedecree in the National Law of Culture.14 Despite that ideal of nationalculture, established by administrative decree, Ecuadorian society hascontinued to be multi-ethnic and multi-cultural, and both racism againstIndigenous peoples and extremes of wealth and poverty persist.Ecuadorian law incorporated the doctrine of terra nullius, a racistdoctrine that was used by European colonial powers in the Age ofDiscovery to provide a legal justification for annexing territories thatwere inhabited by Indigenous peoples and asserting legal and politicalsovereignty over Indigenous peoples. The doctrine of terra nullius hasbeen aptly described by Peter Russell as both “confused andconfusing,”15 but it has nonetheless had an enduring effect on the wayEcuador has defined its relationship with the Huaorani. Essentially, it is alegal fiction that treats lands that were claimed by discovering Europeanstates as uninhabited—and thus belonging to no one—despite thepresence of Indigenous peoples. The doctrine denies property andpolitical rights to indigenous peoples based on the racist presumption that11. KIMERLING, supra note 8; see also Ley Especial Para Adjudicación de TierrasBaldias en la Amazonia [Special Law for Adjudication of Titles to UncultivatedWastelands in the Amazon], Supreme Decree No. 196, R.O. No. 2 (Feb. 17, 1972); Leyde Colonización de la Región Amazonica [Law for Colonization of the Amazon Region],Decree No. 2091, R.O. No. 504 (Jan. 12, 1978).12. For a fuller discussion, see Kimerling, supra note 7, at 426–33.13. NORMAN E. WHITTEN, JR., INT’L WORK GRP. FOR INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS,ECUADORIAN ETHNOCIDE AND INDIGENOUS ETHNOGENESIS: AMAZONIAN RESURGENCEAMIDST ANDEAN COLONIALISM 10–12 (1976).14. Id. at 13.15. PETER H. RUSSELL, RECOGNIZING ABORIGINAL TITLE: THE MABO CASE ANDINDIGENOUS RESISTANCE TO ENGLISH-SETTLER COLONIZATION 38 (2005).

2013]Oil, Contact, and Conservation in the Amazon49even though they lived on the land at the time of colonization, they were“savages” who were incapable of exercising political sovereignty orowning their lands, and their political economies were so“underdeveloped” that their very existence as self-governing societies, inpossession of their lands, could be denied.16In conjunction with the Doctrine of Discovery—a relatedinternational legal construct that can be traced back more than fivehundred years to papal documents authorizing “discovery” of nonChristian lands, and which states that a Christian monarch who locates,or discovers, non-Christian, “heathen” lands has the right to claimdominion over them17—the doctrine of terra nullius has served as a legaljustification for violating the rights of the Huaorani. In a preliminarystudy of the Doctrine of Discovery for the United Nations PermanentForum on Indigenous Issues, then-forum member Tonya GonnellaFrichner identified two key elements of the doctrine: dehumanization anddominance. Frichner found that the institutionalization of the doctrine inlaw and policy at national and international levels “lies at the root of theviolations of indigenous peoples’ human rights . . . and has resulted inState claims to and the mass appropriation of the lands, territories andresources of indigenous peoples.”18 Although Frichner primarilyexamined the operation of the Doctrine of Discovery and related“framework of dominance”19 in U.S. federal Indian law, her findings areconsistent with the experience of the Huaorani in Ecuador. There, aEuropean colonial power and successor nation state have similarly usedthe Doctrine of Discovery and legal fiction of terra nullius to assert botha supreme, overriding title to Huaorani lands, territory, and resources anda paramount right to subjugate and govern the Huaorani, andappropriated Huaorani lands for oil extraction without consent orcompensation. That, in turn, has resulted in dispossession and newproblems and challenges for the Huaorani.16. For a fuller discussion, see id. at 30–42; Special Rapporteur of the U.N.Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, Preliminary Study of the Impact on IndigenousPeoples of the International Legal Construct Known as the Doctrine of Discovery, 010.13%20EN.pdf [hereinafterU.N. Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, Preliminary Study]; STEVEN T. NEWCOMB,PAGANS IN THE PROMISED LAND: DECODING THE DOCTRINE OF DISCOVERY (2008).17. U.N. Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, Preliminary Study, supra note 16;NEWCOMB, supra note 16.18. U.N. Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, Preliminary Study, supra note 16.19. Id.

50Colo. J. Int’l Envtl. L. & Pol’y[Vol. 24:1This remarkable claim, that the Amazon region was “tierrasbaldías,” vacant, uncultivated wastelands which belonged to the Statebecause they had no other owner, despite the presence of the Huaoraniand other Indigenous populations, was the prevailing doctrine indomestic law when the oil boom began.20 It was not until 1997 thatEcuador affirmed, in a submission to the Inter-American Commission onHuman Rights for a report on human rights in Ecuador, that “theprocesses of ‘directed colonization’ and the consideration of large tractsof the Amazon basin as ‘tierras baldias’ may be consideredsuperseded.”21 By then, oil extraction and internal colonization bysettlers had displaced the Huaorani from many areas. Moreover,notwithstanding that policy change, the right of the Huaorani to own andcontrol their remaining lands, territory, and resources has continued to belimited by laws and policies that control the characterization and grantingof title and by laws and policies associated with development andconservation activities. The Doctrine of Discovery and framework ofdominance continue to serve as the foundation of human rights violationsin Ecuador and undermine the land and self-determination rights of theHuaorani.For the Huaorani, Ecuador’s national integration policy meantthat their ancestral lands were occupied and degraded by outsiders. AsTexaco expanded its operations and advanced into Huaorani territory,Huaorani warriors tried to drive off the oil invaders with hardwoodspears. In response, Ecuador, Texaco, and missionaries from theSIL/WBT collaborated to pacify the Huaorani and end their way of life.Using aircraft supplied by Texaco, SIL/WBT intensified and expandedits program to contact, settle, and convert the Huaorani. Missionariescruised the skies searching for Huaorani homes, dropping “gifts” andcalling out to people through radio transmitters hidden in baskets20. See, e.g., Ley de Tierras Baldías y Colonización [Uncultivated Wastelands andColonization Law], Supreme Decree No. 2172, R.O. No. 342 (Nov. 28, 1964); Ley deTierras Baldías y Colonización [Uncultivated Wastelands and Colonization Law],Supreme Decree No. 2753, R.O. No. 663 (Jan. 6, 1966); Ley Especial Para Adjudicaciónde Tierras Baldias en la Amazonia [Special Law for Adjudication of Titles toUncultivated Wastelands in the Amazon], Supreme Decree No. 196, in R.O. No. 2 (Feb.17, 1972); Ley de Colonización de la Región Amazonica [Law for Colonization of theAmazon Region], Decree No. 2091, R.O. No. 504 (Jan. 12, 1978); JORGE O. VELA &JUAN LARREA HOLGUIN, ORG. OF AM. STATES, A STATEMENT OF THE LAWS OF ECUADORIN MATTERS AFFECTING BUSINESS (3d ed. 1975).21. INTER-AM. COMM’N ON HUMAN RIGHTS, OAS.Ser.L/V/II.96, REPORT ON THESITUATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS IN ECUADOR 100 (1997), available %20-%20ecuador.htm.

2013]Oil, Contact, and Conservation in the Amazon51lowered from the air. It was during this period, in the late 1960s andearly 1970s, that most Huaorani were “contacted” by cowode for the firsttime.22More than 200 Huaorani were pressured and tricked into leavingtheir homes, and taken to live in a distant Christian settlement.23 OtherHuaorani, including many in the area now known as Yasuni, refused tobe “tamed”24 but were displaced from large areas of their traditionalterritory. At least one family group, the Tagaeri-Taromenane, hascontinued to resist contact with outsiders and lives in voluntary isolationin the forest. Rosemary Kingsland, a journalist who wrote about theevangelization of the Huaorani with the missionaries’ cooperation,described the mood of the time:The northern [oil] strike was enormous. . . . Nothing would stop themfrom going in[to Huaorani territory] now and there was talk of usingguns, bombs, flame-throwers. Most of the talk was wild, but theresult would be the same: a war between the oil men and the Aucas; ahandful of naked savages standing squarely in the middle of fields ofblack gold, blocking the progress of the machine age. If it was to be aquestion of no oil or no Aucas, there was only one answer. 25The Huaorani who went to live with the missionaries were told thatHuaorani culture is sinful and savage and were pressured to change,become “civilized,” and adopt the Christian way of life. Among otherhardships, there were epidemics of new diseases (including a polio22. For a fuller discussion, see STOLL, supra note 2; Kimerling, supra note 7, at460–63; and Kimerling, supra note 4, at 75–84. For accounts of SIL/WBT’s operations tocontact and convert the Huaorani from the SIL/WBT missionaries’ perspective, seeELLIOT, supra note 3; ELLIOT, supra note 4; WALLIS, THE DAYUMA STORY, supra note 4;ETHEL EMILY WALLIS, AUCAS DOWNRIVER: DAYUMA’S STORY TODAY (1973); andROSEMARY KINGSLAND, A SAINT AMONG SAVAGES (1980). For a report on collaborationby missionaries and the international oil industry to pacify indigenous peoples inEcuador, see J.F. SANDOVAL MOREANO, CEPE, PUEBLOS INDÍGENAS Y PETRÓLEO EN LAAMAZONÍA ECUATORIANA [INDIGENOUS PEOPLES AND PETROLEUM IN THE ECUADORIANAMAZON] (1988).23. See generally WALLIS, AUCAS DOWNRIVER, supra note 22.24. The term “tamed” is borrowed from WALLIS, AUCAS DOWNRIVER, supra note22. Wallis wrote “the ‘inside’ Auca story” for SIL/WBT, id. at ix, and described the(Yasuni) Huaorani who had not relocated to live with the missionaries as “untamed anduntaught,” id. at 121. Some of those households were subsequently “contacted” byCatholic missionaries, with support from the national oil company, CEPE, in the late1970s. See MONS. ALEJANDRO LABACA UGARTE, CRONICA HUAORANI [HUAORANICHRONICLE] (1993).25. KINGSLAND, supra note 22, at 125–26.

52Colo. J. Int’l Envtl. L. & Pol’y[Vol. 24:1epidemic); important rainforest products were depleted; and theHuaorani, whose culture values personal autonomy, sharing andegalitarianism, had to rely on imported foods and medicines obtained bythe missionaries. The new foods, medicines, and gifts of consumer itemsthat the Huaorani could not themselves produce or obtain from their“giving” rainforest territory created relationships of dependency,inequality, and new needs for trading relationships with cowode.Many elders recall the time “when the civilization arrived” as aperiod of great suffering, when new diseases sickened and killed manypeople. When some families returned to the land of their ancestors yearslater, it was not the same as before. The forest that was their home andsource of life had been invaded and damaged by outsiders while theywere away. In addition to wells, pipelines and production stations,Texaco built a 100-kilometer road into Huaorani territory—which itnamed “Via Auca” (Auca Road)—and settlers used the new road tocolonize Huaorani lands.26As a result of Texaco’s operations, the Huaorani lost their politicalsovereignty and sovereignty over their natural resources, and theirterritory, lands, and resources were significantly reduced. Manyremaining lands and resources have been degraded, and pollution is acontinuing problem and growing threat for a number of communities.These changes, in turn, have produced a host of new problems andchallenges for the Huaorani, including the erosion of food security andself-reliance in meeting basic needs. Moreover, because Huaorani cultureco-evolved with the Huaorani’s rainforest ecosystem, there is aninextricable relationship between Huaorani culture and the Huaorani’secosystem. As a result, the environmental injuries and displacement fromancestral lands have not only harmed the means of subsistence of theHuaorani, but also undermined their ability to conduct certain culturalpractices and transmit their culture to future generations. As a group, theHuaorani have been thrust into a process of rapid change, externalpressures, and loss of territory and access to natural resources thatendangers their survival as a people. Texaco no longer operates inEcuador, but its tragic legacy remains, and a growing number of other oilcompanies and settlers continue to push deeper into Huaorani lands.The missionaries who worked with Texaco had their ownconverging interests. SIL/WBT described the “Aucas” as “murderers at26. In addition to campesino settlers from Ecuador’s highland and coastal regions,the Huaorani also lost lands to Shuar and Kiwcha (Quichua), who are indigenous to theAmazon, but moved into Huaorani territory during this period.

2013]Oil, Contact, and Conservation in the Amazon53heart” and its operation to convert them as “one of the mostextraordinary missionary endeavors” of the twentieth century, “livingproof of miracles brought to pass through God’s word.”27 Nonetheless,the forced contact and relocation of the Huaorani was a systemic,ethnocidal public policy and campaign, promoted and aided by Ecuadorand Texaco in order to open Huaorani territory to oil extraction and severthe Huaorani’s connection with their ancestral lands in areas where thecompany wanted to operate.28 In addition to ignoring the basic humanrights of the Huaorani, it was a form of discrimination that deniedcultural, political, and property rights to them based on the prejudice ofcultural superiority.29 SIL/WBT was evidently aware of the convergenceof interests; in “the ‘inside’ Auca story”30 written by Ethel Emily Wallis,27. See WALLIS, AUCAS DOWNRIVER, supra note 22, at front flap, ix, 68; see alsoWALLIS, supra note 4, at front flap (describing the “Aucas” as “the world’s mostmurderous tribe”). Stoll describes SIL/WBT’s activities with the Huaorani as its “mostfamous mission.” STOLL, supra note 2, at vii.28. The term “ethnocidal policy” is borrowed from WHITTEN, supra note 13. Ananthropologist, Whitten explains: “The concept of ethnocide is taken from genocide, andrefers to the process of exterminating the total lifeway of a people or nation, but in theethnocidal process many of the peoples themselves are allowed to continue living.” Id. at24. Whitten was conducting field research with another Amazonian people, the CanelosQuichua, when the oil rush began. He described the “attempts of ethnocide aimed atindigenous people” generally in Ecuador’s Amazon region as “systemic, large scale, andplanned, as well as random, local and unintended.” Id. “Illustrations” of ethnocidalpolicies cited by Whitten included “monolingual education in Spanish, proselytization byCatholics and Protestants, courses in social organization aimed at altering family, kinship,and other bases of social cooperation and competition launched by government, church,and Peace Corp Volunteers, and the steady encapsulation of natives on erodingterritories.” Id. In essence, those national policies were “aimed at cultural obliteration andassimilation into a lower class serf-like existence.” Id. at 3–4. Whitten also wrote aboutinternal colonialism and described “the ordinary colonist” (settler) in the Amazon regionas “bluntly racist,” reporting that it was “common to hear ‘the Indian is more backwardthan the animals’, ‘the Indian is lower than the animals’, and ‘the Indian is not a personbecause he is lower than the animals.’ ” Id. at 26. Today, those kinds of comments are nolonger common in ordinary conversation; however, racism against both Indigenouspeoples generally, and the Huaorani in particular, persists. For a fuller discussion, seeKimerling, supra note 7, at 429–30.29. The definition of discrimination is based on the United Nations Declaration onthe Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, which was adopted by the UNGeneral Assembly in 1963, G.A. Res. 1904(XVIII), U.N. Doc. A/RES/18/1904, and theInternational Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination,which entered into force in 1969, International Convention on the Elimination of AllForms of Racial Discrimination, Dec. 21, 1965, 660 U.N.T.S. 195, 212.30. WALLIS, AUCAS DOWNRIVER, supra note 22, at ix.

54Colo. J. Int’l Envtl. L. & Pol’y[Vol. 24:1another missionary describes one of many helicopter operationssupported by “the oil people” and comments on the expense:This thing costs 200-300 an hour to run; and it was a three-houroperation—besides the four high-priced employees! The oil people,in turn, are more than willing to do what they can for our operation,since we have almost cleared their whole concession of Aucas. Theyassure us that they aren’t just being generous!31In 1969, Ecuador established a “Protectorate” for the Huaorani inthe southwestern edge of their ancestral territory, which included the newChristian settlement, but only some 3.3 percent of Huaorani ancestrallands (66,578 hectares, or 665.78 square kilometers). In 1983, the areawas titled to the Huaorani.32 In 1990, a much larger area—6,125.6 squarekilometers (subsequentl

Mountains to the Pacific coast. The “first barrel” of Amazon Crude was paraded through the streets of the capital, Quito, like a hero. People could get drops of crude to commemorate the occasion and after the parade, the oil drum was placed on an a