Kashmir and the application of the egalitarian shared sovereignty
The latest posts on this series about TERRITORIAL DISPUTES centered the attention on Kashmir. The last two posts introduced the EGALITARIAN SHARED SOVEREIGNTY and some key elements related to Kashmir respectively.
In general, by applying the egalitarian shared sovereignty, as Kashmiris would be citizens of both sovereign States, they would have a common passport—a Kashmiri passport—valid in both Pakistan and India. In relation to their language, it is a fact the three main spoken ones are Kashmiri, Urdu and Hindi; so they all can be made official.
In religion, as the second pre-requisite recognizes basic non-political liberties, freedom of belief would be adopted at a constitutional level, so that no one may be discriminated based on religion. All this is controlled by the lexically prior prerequisite of non-political liberties.
In particular, as the difference in this example is given by the larger society and stronger economy in India, this State would have a stronger constraint in being a welcoming party for the Kashmiris (input-to-output ratio principle). In that sense, the main concern for them—unemployment—would be acknowledged (principle of efficiency).
That is because, although Pakistan would also have the obligation to welcome Kashmiris as its citizens in its territory, the Kashmiris would have the right to opt to be nationals of both States—i.e. they have the right to relocate to either State.
Thus, even though it is a fact that both populations, that of Pakistan and that of India are large in comparison to Kashmir, they would not be a threat to local employees since in order to work in Kashmir restrictions on nationals of either States would apply—because they would be nationals of either India or Pakistan, but not Kashmiris.
In regard to governmental corruption and threats to human rights, reciprocal control amongst the three parties (egalitarian consensus principle) could secure an improvement in the present situation—a point to be discussed when dealing with government in this series.
In particular, employment opportunities generated within the boundaries of both Kashmir because of the exploitation of natural resources, could be the result of a joint enterprise, details of which will be discussed when considering territory.
NOTE: This post is based on Jorge Emilio Núñez, “Territorial Disputes and State Sovereignty: International Law and Politics,” London and New York: Routledge, Taylor and Francis Group, 2020 (forthcoming)
Previous published research monograph about territorial disputes and sovereignty by the author, Jorge Emilio Núñez, “Sovereignty Conflicts and International Law and Politics: A Distributive Justice Issue,” London and New York: Routledge, Taylor and Francis Group, 2017.
NEXT POST: Kashmir, people and the egalitarian shared sovereignty
Tuesday 08th October 2019
Dr Jorge Emilio Núñez