Just days after hundreds of veterans pledged to join protesters at Standing Rock, the federal government issued a formal request for Native American tribes protesting against the construction of the pipeline to cease physical presence at the North Dakota site. Given the deadline of Dec. 5 to evacuate, protesters who refuse to leave are at risk of prosecution.

In a letter addressed to tribal chairman Dave Archambault, Colonel John Henderson states:

“This decision is necessary to protect the general public from the violent confrontations between protestors and law enforcement officials that have occurred in this area, and to prevent death, illness, or serious injury to inhabitants of encampments due to the harsh North Dakota winter conditions.”

He also adds,

“As I have publically stated, I am asking you, as a Tribal leader, to encourage members of your Tribe, as well as any non-members who support you who are located in the encampments north of the Cannonball River on Corps’ lands to immediately and peacefully move to the free speech zone south of the Cannonball River or to a more sustainable location for the winter. I am genuinely concerned for the safety and well-being of both the members of your Tribe and the general public located at these encampments.”

Archambault was quick to address this surprising development, calling upon President Obama and the United States of America to honor their treaties with the Native Americans:

“Our Tribe is deeply disappointed in this decision by the United States, but our resolve to protect our water is stronger than ever. We ask that all everyone who can appeal to President Obama and the Army Corps of Engineers to consider the future of our people and rescind all permits and deny the easement to cross the Missouri River just north of our Reservation and straight through our treaty lands. When Dakota Access Pipeline chose this route, they did not consider our strong opposition. Our concerns were clearly articulated directly to them in a meeting on Sept. 30, 2014.”

Archambault also highlights the problematic history between the federal government and native tribes:

“Although the news is saddening, it is not at all surprising given the last 500 years of the treatment of our people. We have suffered much, but we still have hope that the President will act on his commitment to close the chapter of broken promises to our people and especially our children.”

Henderson’s feeble offer of a “free speech zone” south of the Cannonball River comes off as insincere. Although his concern for protestors’ safety (following one woman’s injury by grenade) may be genuine, the denial of Native American protesters to remain this area of their sacred lands is truly disrespectful.

This free speech zone is a child’s compromise and it ultimately makes clear that, regardless of the opposition and how its movement has grown by the minute, the Army Corps still intends to build the Dakota Access Pipeline.

Whether you are in support of the DAPL for its projected economic boon or against its detrimental effects on the environment, one thing is for certain: we must acknowledge the history of wrongdoing the United States has enacted at the expense of our Native American brothers and sisters. We must understand that the Battle of Little Bighorn and the Indian Removal Act are not abstract events existing merely in the twenty pages American textbooks allots to Native American history. No, the implications and the wounds have carried on, passed from generation to generation. They exist today in the depletion of our environmental resources, the greedy squandering of sacred lands. They exist in the DAPL.