Conflict resolution efforts of nearly seventy years between the Negev Bedouin and the State of Israel tend to focus on the main issue of disagreement--land ownership and its proof.1 Yet, beyond legal aspects of ownership, historical narratives, and culturally different values attached to land are used and manipulated in this conflict by direct and indirect players. Territorial conflict often lasts longer than the material benefits seem to merit due to added issues of identity and attachment, which develop over time.² Therefore, the legal lens is limited in addressing this complex: historic, political, social, economic, cultural, and ethnic conflict. Inter-cultural engagement between a modern state and a semi-nomadic people challenge the prospects of conflict resolution. This is similarly challenged in other contexts of the Middle East, Australia, Canada, and the United States. Political and ideological aspects, along with the factor of time, have further entrenched the regional Arab-Israeli conflict. These factors have increased the toll on the entire Negev population and environment--especially on the Bedouin population. The narrative of indigeneity is a recent strategy in this conflict, linking the Bedouin struggle with that of First Peoples, Aboriginals, and Native Americans.³ This context widens the narrow legal discourse currently employed in Israel regarding Bedouin land rights. However, the narrative of indigeneity has not been helpful in resolving this conflict. This context also contributes to prospects of comparative research. As the overall context of the ongoing Arab-Israeli conflict unfolds, the question of Bedouin indigeneity can also polarize and politicize the conflict--distancing the parties from urgent pragmatic compromises. Therefore, linking the narrative of indigenous people worldwide is unlikely a productive strategy in addressing the conflict of Bedouin land rights. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]