What If We Stopped Asking and Started Acting Like a State?
Why observer status shouldn't be the ceiling and what Indigenous diplomatic infrastructure could look like in practice.
I want to tell you about a shift in my thinking.
For years, I operated within the system as it presented itself. Observer status. Speaking slots. Bilaterals. Consultations. Input that gets “considered.”
I accepted these as the terms of engagement. The price of participation.
Then something changed.
The Pattern
I started noticing how differently States operate.
They don’t ask for permission to participate. They’re permanently present. They have staff whose job is to protect their interests across every relevant forum.
When text moves in a direction they don’t like, they intervene. They don’t wait for a speaking slot. They’re already in the room.
They coordinate across processes. What happens in one forum, they track in all the others. They think in systems. They play long games.
And they’re effective. Not because they’re smarter. Because they’re structured to win.
What Changed
One night, after another frustrating negotiation, I asked myself a simple question.
What if Indigenous Peoples acted more like a country?
Not became a state. We’re not that, and we shouldn’t want to be (yet). But what if we built the kind of infrastructure States use to protect their interests?
A permanent presence. Staff tracking processes. Institutional memory. Cross-forum coordination. Real-time intervention capacity.
So, that’s why I moved to Geneva 2,5 years ago.
Yes, at first for the enhanced participation process, but then I asked myself…what if we stopped accepting observer status as the ceiling and started building toward something else?
The obstacles are real. Funding. Legal status. The diversity of Indigenous Peoples globally. The fact that we don’t fit Westphalian categories.
But these are implementation challenges. Not laws of physics.
States built their infrastructure because they needed it. Decided it mattered. Invested in it.
We could make the same choice. Not easily. But possibly.
What Already Exists
We’re not starting from nothing.
Indigenous Peoples already have extraordinary diplomatic capacity. Years of engagement across multiple UN processes. Deep knowledge of how the system works.
We have veterans who’ve been doing this for decades. Who understand the informal rules. Who’ve built relationships across the system.
We have emerging leaders who are hungry to engage but lack pathways to learn.
What we don’t have is the infrastructure to capture and deploy all of this systematically. To be present every day. To coordinate across forums. To build institutional memory that survives individual departures.
My Vision
Imagine an Indigenous office in Geneva.
Not an NGO that hosts occasional events. An office that behaves like a permanent mission.
Present in key negotiations. Not just the big plenaries. The informals. The drafting sessions. The corridor conversations where real decisions are made.
Tracking text across processes. Watching how language in UNFCCC might affect CBD. Flagging when something in the Human Rights Council has implications for peacebuilding. Seeing the whole board.
Advising Indigenous delegations in real-time. Briefings before sessions. War rooms during key moments. Debriefs that capture what happened and why. Building relationships with states and UN bodies over years, not just during visits.
An office that catches emerging Indigenous diplomats and teaches them through the work. That captures institutional memory before it’s lost. That coordinates so we’re not constantly surprised by cross-forum effects.
Small on purpose. Sharp by design. Indigenous led and accountable to Indigenous Peoples, not to funders or States.
Before You Go
What this would mean?
It would mean closing the presence gap. Being there when decisions happen, not just when statements are delivered.
It would mean closing the memory gap. Knowledge captured and passed on instead of walking out the door when elders retire.
It would mean closing the coordination gap. Seeing the whole board. Connecting dots. Anticipating cross-forum risks.
It wouldn’t solve everything. The system still has biases. States still resist. The architecture still wasn’t built for us.
But it would change what’s possible. It would move us from reactive to proactive. From observers to operators.
Think about one thing you’ve been asking for in UN processes. Now imagine you had permanent presence to pursue it. Staff tracking it daily. Relationships built over years. Real-time intervention when it matters.
What could you achieve then that you can’t achieve now?
That gap is the opportunity.
As you can guess.
I’ll check in with you soon with news!