For weeks, protesters in the thousands have been have been playing a tense waiting game with police on the banks of the Missouri River an hour south of Bismarck, North Dakota. The protesters gained a partial victory on Sunday, when Jo-Ellen Darcy, the Army’s assistant secretary for civil works, announced that the Corps had decided not to grant the Dakota Access Pipeline company an easement to dig under the Missouri River.
In her statement, Darcy explained that her decision was “based… on a need to explore alternate routes for the Dakota Access Pipeline crossing.” The decision on the easement had been delayed in mid-November in order to allow for additional meetings with the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe.
“Although we have had continuing discussion and exchanges of new information with the Standing Rock Sioux and Dakota Access, it’s clear that there’s more work to do,” Darcy said. “The best way to complete that work responsibly and expeditiously is to explore alternate routes for the pipeline crossing.”
After building hundreds of miles of pipe, the pipeline project has stalled over an easement of around 500 feet which would allow the pipeline to pass beneath the river at a depth of around 92 feet.
Responses from the protesters varied. Standing Rock Sioux Tribal Chairman Dave Archambault II expressed gratitude for both Obama’s decision and the protesters who helped bring it to pass. However, he concluded by welcoming a future of reconciliation with local law enforcement, the Trump administration, and, potentially, oil.
“We are not opposed to energy independence, economic development, or national security concerns but we must ensure that these decisions are made with the considerations of our Indigenous peoples,” he said.
Meanwhile, a post from the Sacred Stone Camp praised the decision to revaluate the pipeline, but took a stronger stance, calling on allies worldwide to continue a “Global Month of #NoDAPL” by protesting banks which have provided loans to finance the $3.4 billion project.
“I was asked, “When do you consider this pipeline issue to be over?” says LaDonna Allard, director of the Sacred Stone Camp. “I said, when every pipe is out of the ground and the earth is repaired across the United States. I am not negotiating, I am got backing down. I must stand for our grandchildren and for the water.”
The group has posted a list of questions about possible future pipeline plans, which make it clear that they consider “no-build” a necessary option to keep on the table.
Still, the protesters realize that “while this is clearly a victory, the battle is not ‘over'”.
Energy Transfer Partners, the company constructing the pipeline, released a statement that called the Corps’ statement “a purely political decision.” The statement expressed frustration that after the company had “done nothing but play by the rules” it was nevertheless handed an eleventh-hour denial.
“The White House’s directive today to the Corps for further delay is just the latest in a series of overt and transparent political actions by an administration which has abandoned the rule of law in favor of currying favor with a narrow and extreme political constituency,” the statement said.
Since the Corps of Engineers answers to the secretary of defense, it will be under new leadership in January. This leaves open the possibility that the new administration could quickly reverse Sunday’s decision. Donald Trump’s transition team met with North Dakota senator John Hoeven on Thursday to discuss the pipeline. Afterwards, Hoeven said that Trump “expressed his support for the Dakota Access Pipeline, which has met or exceeded all environmental standards set forth by four states and the Army Corps of Engineers.”
On Monday, Trump’s position was made official by Trump spokesman Jason Miller.
“With regard to the Dakota Access Pipeline, that’s something that we support construction of and we’ll review the full situation when we’re in the White House to make appropriate determination at that time,” said Miller.
Now it seems that the waiting game has shifted. While the construction company waits for a friendlier administration to take office, protesters hope to stall the project long enough that its complete is no longer economically feasible. Already, the pipeline will not be operation by January 1, 2017, the date when it was supposed to be ready to ship oil. If it is not operational on the first, companies which had signed contracts to ship oil through the pipeline will have the option to either drop their shipping contracts or renegotiate the rates.
