The ongoing violence against minorities in Iraq poses many challenges to the multi-ethnic foundation of Iraqi society. In particular, the systematic targeting of minority communities presents a serious threat to the existence of the indigenous people, the Assyrians, as they are at risk of extinction. However, their identity as indigenous presents an interesting area of inquiry since they are often recognized as ethnic-religious minority instead of indigenous. This comparison between their status as minorities or indigenous provides a valuable opportunity to examine the uses and limits of the discourse of human rights, and the benefits and drawbacks of utilizing a minorities or indigenous political rights framework. In doing this, this paper provides a comparison between the human rights approaches to explore the thoughtful ways in which the indigenous rights regime compels fruitful understandings and solutions for assessing the Assyrian case. The paper seeks to answer the following question: how does a community such as the Assyrians benefit from using an indigenous rights framework rather than a minority rights one to attain their political rights? I seek to answer this by first theoretically analyzing the relations between disenfranchised minority and indigenous groups, respectively, and the state. Secondly, this will be juxtaposed with post-2003 Assyrians’ acts of resistance and movements, examining their continued plight for indigenous recognition in Iraq and internationally, to highlight the importance of the indigenous rights regime for securing and safeguarding their rights as the native inhabitants of Northern Iraq. This will be essential in analyzing the myriad ways in which the internationalization of indigenous rights challenges the international norms of human rights with their recognition of collective rights.