Nisga’a Nation says it wasn’t consulted on pipeline proposals
The coastal First Nation says it's "singularly focused" on its LNG projects, which face opposition from its own members and other bands.
This story was originally published in Alberta Native News.
Nisga’a Nation in northwestern B.C. says it hasn’t been consulted on proposed routes for a new tar sands pipeline that pass through its modern Treaty lands.
On June 1, the CBC reported that Alberta’s government is examining three potential routes to B.C.’s northern coast for a new bitumen pipeline that Prime Minister Mark Carney agreed to designate as a priority project in his memorandum of understanding with Premier Danielle Smith.
The story was based on documents, “which were shown to local community leaders during private consultations on the proposed project this spring,” wrote CBC business reporter Kyle Bakx.
The Nisga’a Lisims Government issued a June 2 statement to clarify that it wasn’t part of these consultations.
“We can confirm that the Nisga’a Lisims Government has held no discussions with the Alberta and the Federal Government about any oil pipeline proposals,” said the statement.
In 2000, the landmark Nisga’a Final Agreement was signed by Nisga’a Nation, the Government of B.C., and the Government of Canada, which established the Nisga’a Lisims Government and recognized its jurisdiction over the Nass Wildlife Area.
The Nisga’a Lisims Government notes that some of the proposed routes end up in ports that are part of its Treaty territory, and another crosses through it, all of which would require consultation with the First Nation.
“All Nisga’a citizens can rest assured that despite this ill-conceived process being advanced by the Alberta Government, nothing can happen on our lands without our consent, our Treaty guarantees it,” reads the statement.
“At the same time, anybody can draw lines on a map and speculate about all kinds of projects.”
The First Nation band added that it’s “singularly focused” on its own liquified natural gas (LNG) projects, Ksi Lisims export terminal and the Prince Rupert Gas Transmission (PRGT) pipeline, which are being done “in a way that is compatible with our values and long-term objectives.”
Both projects, referred to collectively as Ksi Lisims LNG, have been designated as a priority at the Major Projects Office by Prime Minister Carney, with the plan to export 12 million tonnes of LNG annually upon completion.
In May, the Canadian government facilitated a deal with Germany to export a million tonnes of Ksi Lisims LNG annually starting in 2030.
The Nisga’a Lisims Government is facing a lawsuit over the project at the B.C. Supreme Court from two of its own members, who argue that band leadership didn’t adequately consult its members on the $12-billion project.
Last year, the Lax Kw’alaams Band and the Metlakatla First Nation filed separate judicial review applications in Federal Court against the federal government for approving the LNG project without considering its broader impact.
Iran responds to Israeli attack on Beirut suburbs with ballistic missiles
Iran has attacked Israel with ballistic missiles for the first time since the two countries and the U.S. reached an April ceasefire, with the strikes coming hours after Israel launched an attack on Lebanon’s capital.
The Iranian projectiles were all intercepted by Israel’s missile defence system on Sunday.
U.S. President Donald Trump’s administration is in the middle of negotiations on a longer-term truce with Iran to open the Strait of Hormuz, which the Iranians blockaded after the U.S. and Israel launched a war on Iran in late February.
Another consequence of the war was Iranian-backed Lebanese Shiite militia and political party Hizbollah attacking Israel on its northern border.
As Middle East scholars Muhannad Ayyash of Mount Royal University and Jeremy Wildeman of the University of Ottawa told me in our livestream the other day, Iran insists that any long-term ceasefire deal apply to Lebanon.
Since March, Israel has occupied about 20% of Lebanese territory, killed more than 3,000 people and displaced hundreds of thousands, even after a ceasefire was announced on April 16.
The Financial Times reports that the Israeli strikes on Beirut appear to have targeted the Dahiyeh suburb, where support for Hizbollah is strong:
The Israeli military claimed it was “striking Hizbollah infrastructure”, without providing any evidence.
The strike came days after Hizbollah rejected a ceasefire negotiated between Israel and the Lebanese government — the latest of many that have failed to quell the fighting. This most recent attempt would have required the militant group to cease its activities in southern Lebanon and begin to disarm, without making clear what concessions, if any, Israel would make.
It also did not specify a timeline for Israeli forces to withdraw from the swaths of Lebanese territory they now occupy.
Instead, Israel’s defence minister Israel Katz said earlier this week that his country would continue its operations in southern Lebanon, and Lebanese residents would not yet be allowed to return to their homes there.
For what it’s worth, Trump said he’s “not happy” with the Israeli strikes on Lebanon and would urge the Israelis not to retaliate against Iran.
The Israeli military vowed that it would “strike the enemy with determination as soon as the order is given.”
Minister of National Security Itamar Ben Gvir, a far-right extremist even by Israeli standards, said: “Tehran must burn tonight.”
The Islamic Revolution Guards Corps said that any Israeli response will invite “even more forceful and regret-inducing strikes.”
Hinting at a wider regional conflagration, the Kata’ib Hizbollah militia in Iraq vowed that U.S. military bases would become “legitimate targets” if the U.S. retaliated on Israel’s behalf.