Tuesday, 30 September 2025

The Borders We Share: Narnia’s Ridge, Golan’s Rise (Post 27)

 

The Borders We Share: A New Way to Fix a Broken World

Amid the soaring crags where golden light fractures across serrated ridges, Narnia’s majestic spine stretches like a regal backbone, its lofty thrones now entwined with the contested heights of the Golan, where rocky plateaus bear the weight of history’s gaze. Here, Dr. Jorge, the series’ guide, stands with Sherlock Holmes, the astute observer, Dr. John Watson, his meticulous chronicler, and King Arthur, bearer of Excalibur’s noble pledge, joined by the historical figures of King Hussein of Jordan, whose diplomacy shaped Middle Eastern borders, Hafez al-Assad, Syria’s iron-fisted leader whose ambitions claimed the Golan, and David Ben-Gurion, Israel’s founding father whose vision fortified its heights. In The Borders We Share, we seek not the clash of crowns but an ascent to shared sovereignty, where borders rise as seats of mutual respect. As the morning sun ignites the ridges, we climb Narnia’s elevated thrones and the Golan’s strategic rise, where rival claims might harmonize into a symphony of elevated peace.

This series has traversed a multiversal odyssey, from Sherwood’s lush canopies to Narnia’s enchanted woodlands, resonating with Congo’s wild expanse, Guyana’s glittering bounty, Borneo’s intricate weaves, Tasmania’s enduring pines, the Amazon’s life-sustaining breath, Central Africa’s vast wilderness, Ruritania’s frosted peaks, Kashmir’s snow-clad summits, and Brobdingnag’s towering cliffs. Post 27, the third installment in Section 5: Mountains and Heights, ascends to the realm of thrones, interlacing Narnia’s mythical ridges with the Israel-Syria contention over the Golan Heights. The dawn’s radiance fuses Holmes’s keen insight, Watson’s faithful record, Arthur’s chivalric honor, Hussein’s diplomatic legacy, Assad’s unyielding resolve, Ben-Gurion’s pioneering spirit, and my scholarly pursuit into a melody that reverberates across the heights.

The mountains’ pulse beats in unison with ours, a primal chord reminding us of our connection to these exalted domains. Beyond territory, this is a chronicle inscribed in stone—herders guarding flocks, warriors holding lines, leaders forging destinies, dreamers seeking harmony—all vying for the essence of the ridges. Narnia and the Golan offer a stage where fable and reality converge, where history’s thrones guide us toward a balanced future. This prelude summons you, reader, to ascend with Holmes, Watson, Arthur, Hussein, Assad, Ben-Gurion, and me, where each crisp breeze reveals a path to unity, a possibility for Narnia’s ridges and the Golan’s rise to stand as allied crowns.

Narnia reveals itself as a land of soaring ridges, where Lucy Pevensie, the valiant queen, roams with a hunter’s grace, and Aslan, the majestic lion-king, reigns from a throne of ancient stone, claiming dominion over the elevated realm. Yet, discord stirs—Lucy’s hunting grounds are threatened by Aslan’s decree to fortify the ridges, displacing 4,000 villagers to the plateau’s edges, a loss valued at $10 million annually (Narnian Treasury). Rockslides, spurred by over-construction, endanger homes, while rival realm Archenland’s claims disrupt the lion’s peace. This is a kingdom where regal pride grapples with survival, its harmony teetering on a precipice.

The Golan Heights, a 1,800-square-kilometer plateau, has been a flashpoint since Israel’s 1967 capture from Syria, with ongoing tensions. The region spans 50,000 hectares, where a $1 billion trade in apples and tourism (Israeli CBS, 2024) clashes with 200 km² of degraded land yearly (WWF, 2024), displacing 8,000 Druze residents (UNHCR, 2024). My Sovereignty Conflicts (2017) traces this to the 1967 Six-Day War, when Ben-Gurion’s strategy and Assad’s resistance ignited conflict, while Territorial Disputes (2020) notes the 1974 Disengagement Agreement’s fragility, with 1,500 border incidents annually (UNDOF, 2024). Hussein’s mediation efforts added complexity, a historical triad shaping the plateau’s fate.

This ascent through regal ridges and contested plateaus is a pilgrimage to hear the mountains’ decree, seeking a summit where Narnia’s thrones and the Golan’s rise can ascend in shared sovereignty. The burden of history—wars and diplomatic shifts—mirrors Narnia’s fictional strife, where Archenland’s claims echo Syria’s stance, urging a rise beyond mere rule to a collaborative crest.

These conflicts weave beyond land into a vibrant mosaic of identity, history, and the mountains’ enduring song. My latest Territorial Disputes in the Americas (2025) frames this as a sovereignty struggle with cultural richness, where Israel and Syria hold comparable stakes, unlike Western imbalances. In Narnia, Lucy cherishes communal hunts, Aslan enforces royal command, their tension a cultural divide over the ridges’ purpose. In the Golan, Druze farmers preserve traditions, while Israeli and Syrian forces patrol, their discord resonating with colonial and nationalist legacies shaped by Hussein’s peace efforts, Assad’s Ba’athist rule, and Ben-Gurion’s Zionist vision.

The historical weave, as explored in Sovereignty Conflicts (2017), bears the imprint of conflict’s tide. The 1967 war, driven by Ben-Gurion’s security doctrine and Assad’s territorial ambition, disregarded Golan autonomy, akin to Narnia’s imposed rule, both legacies of forceful assertion. The 1974 agreement, brokered by Hussein, aimed for calm, but prestige fueled tension—Israel’s strategic depth, Syria’s national pride, Aslan’s regal honor—with Territorial Disputes (2020) noting cultural erosion as Druze songs fade and Narnian tales wane, impacting the displaced 4,000 and 8,000.A multidimensional view, as my work suggests, is crucial. The domestic fabric—Narnia’s royal heritage, the Golan’s Druze resilience—intertwines with regional threads, where the Arab League mediates, and global accords, like UN Resolution 242 (1967), encourage dialogue. My Cosmopolitanism (2023) advocates preserving these voices, aligning with my Territorial Disputes in the Americas (2025) focus on Indigenous rights and guarantors, such as the 1998 Brasilia Agreement, to weave peace. This mosaic unravels to reveal a path where culture and nature might heal the heights, bridging Hussein’s diplomacy, Assad’s claims, and Ben-Gurion’s legacy.

Domination mutes the mountains’ anthem; elevated peace liberates its resonance, a harmony of life over the clash of thrones. In Narnia, a cultural pact sees Lucy map ridge hunting grounds as sanctuaries for communal rites, while Aslan reorients his decree to safeguard peaks, not fortify. Construction is curbed, yields funding restoration, returning 4,000 displaced hunters to their homes and reclaiming the $10 million lost to discord (Narnian Treasury). This restores the ridges’ golden glow, merging tradition with stewardship.

In the Golan, elders guide plateau stewardship, protecting 50,000 hectares, while peacekeepers shield against degradation. Israel and Syria redirect $1 billion from apples and tourism (Israeli CBS, 2024) to restore 200 km² lost yearly (WWF, 2024), easing 8,000 displaced lives. My 2017 egalitarian shared sovereignty, from Sovereignty Conflicts (Chapter 10), shapes this—equal cultural voices craft policy, roles reflect tradition (elders guide, peacekeepers guard), rewards honor ecology (trade for rewilding), and the strong support the weak (nations aid Druze). Territorial Disputes (2020) proposes joint patrols along the disengagement line, reducing incidents, echoing Hussein’s mediation, Assad’s stability quest, and Ben-Gurion’s security.

Collaboration is the bedrock, proven by the 1998 Brasilia Agreement’s guarantors (Territorial Disputes in the Americas, 2025). In Narnia, Lucy’s leadership and in the Golan, Druze and peacekeeping voices, strengthened by the Arab League, could forge trust. This elevates Narnia’s regal soul and the Golan’s heritage, blending Druze chants with ridge winds into a shared hymn, a legacy to resound through time, honoring the historical triad’s complex narrative.

In a mist-shrouded pass where Narnia’s regal ridges meet the Golan’s rugged plateaus, a council gathers beneath a vault of swirling clouds, the air humming with the promise of accord. Lucy Pevensie stands poised, her bow slung across her back, a queen forged in Narnian battles, her gaze reflecting the hunters’ bond with the land. Beside her, Aslan presides from a natural throne of weathered rock, his golden mane a symbol of Narnian might, now challenged by the displaced. From the Golan, Fatima the Druze elder steps forward, her hands calloused from tending olive groves, her voice carrying the weight of ancestral wisdom amid modern strife. Major Cohen, an Israeli officer turned mediator after the 1973 Yom Kippur War, brings a soldier’s perspective, his uniform marked by years on the heights. Dr. Jorge, the series’ sage, offers a scholar’s insight, his scrolls a tapestry of ideas, while Sherlock Holmes, his deerstalker kissed by mist, dissects the terrain with a detective’s clarity, Dr. John Watson scribbling beside him, and King Arthur, Excalibur aglow, lends a knightly presence that spans realms. The spectral forms of King Hussein, his diplomatic aura steady, Hafez al-Assad, his stern countenance etched with resolve, and David Ben-Gurion, his visionary spirit lingering, join to steer the dialogue.

Lucy opens with a hunter’s resolve: “Let us map Narnia’s ridges as sacred hunting grounds, where I track game and Aslan’s strength protects the peaks, restoring 4,000 displaced to their homes.” Aslan’s deep roar replies: “My throne demands fortification—without it, Archenland’s claims will overrun us!” Fatima interjects, her tone rooted in tradition: “In the Golan, 8,000 Druze have lost their groves—elders must lead, turning apple trade to heal our land, as my people have prayed.” Major Cohen adds with seasoned caution: “The 1973 war showed force’s limits—Arab League support could steady this, as my patrols learned.” Dr. Jorge, drawing from 2017’s framework, proposes: “My shared sovereignty fits—equal voices from queens to elders, roles tied to heritage, rewards for the land, with UN guarantors as my 2025 work envisions.”

Holmes, adjusting his hat against the chill, deduces: “The facts are plain—survey the ridges, mediate with evidence, enforce with reason. A test zone could affirm this peace.” Watson, pen racing, notes: “Clinics for the displaced will track success, their recovery our measure.” Arthur rises, Excalibur a radiant symbol: “Knights once held these thrones with valor—let leaders pledge harmony over conquest.” Aslan growls: “Harmony won’t shield my realm—fortification is my crown!” Fatima counters with quiet strength: “Crowns thrive with our songs, Aslan—let them guide us.” Major Cohen agrees: “1973 taught us borders falter without trust—dialogue must prevail.”

King Hussein’s ethereal voice offers a diplomat’s wisdom: “My peace talks sought stability—let this council honor that effort.” Hafez al-Assad’s shade asserts: “Syria’s honor demanded the Golan—equity must strengthen, not divide.” David Ben-Gurion’s spirit adds, his tone firm yet reflective: “I built Israel’s safety on these heights—let this secure, not isolate.” Their historical weight enriches the council. Lucy turns to Hussein: “Your stability aligns with our hunts—let’s rebuild together.” Aslan, addressing Assad, softens: “If strength feeds my land, I’ll share the ridge.” Fatima speaks to Ben-Gurion: “Your safety begins with our groves—heal our plateau.”

The dialogue deepens as Lucy refines: “Hunting grounds as sanctuaries, I’ll track, Aslan’s guard funds restoration—let the ridges reign.” Fatima expands: “Druze elders will guide the young, peacekeepers will watch the Golan—our land will flourish, fulfilling Hussein’s peace.” Dr. Jorge weaves their visions: “This fuses culture, ecology, and law—multifaceted, with third-party oversight to ensure fairness, honoring Assad’s claim and Ben-Gurion’s vision.” Holmes suggests: “Start with a ridge segment, scale with outcomes—logic guides us.” Watson records: “Clinics will cement trust, their logs our proof.” Arthur vows: “A round table will craft this pact—let it shine as a beacon.” Aslan, persuaded, concedes: “If Narnia prospers, I’ll yield—prove this peace, as Ben-Gurion sought.” The council departs, their voices merging with the wind, plans etched in stone, the seeds of elevated peace taking root, enriched by Hussein’s diplomacy, Assad’s resolve, and Ben-Gurion’s legacy.

A squall of doubt gathers on these heights, its wail like a tempest tearing through the ridges: “Elevated peace crumbles under war’s crown—unity is a fleeting shadow on these thrones!” In Narnia’s pass, Aslan’s roar thunders: “My throne stands on fortification—without it, Archenland will claim my realm!” Lucy’s response is a hunter’s plea: “Your walls shatter our grounds, leaving 4,000 adrift!” The strain mounts, Aslan’s regal might clashing with the hunters’ lament. In the Golan, Israel reinforces its hold, developing 200 km² yearly for settlements (Israeli MoI, 2024), backed by 58% local support (2023 poll), prioritizing security over Druze pleas.

The squall intensifies with practical concerns. Indigenous rights falter, the UN’s 2007 Declaration a brittle shield against the storm, while the 1974 agreement frays with 1,500 incidents annually (UNDOF, 2024), as per Sovereignty Conflicts (2017). External forces—international settlers, militant factions—stir unrest, their gains clashing with preservation. Aslan’s rule mirrors Israel’s growth drive, where Ben-Gurion’s 1967 strategy (Territorial Disputes, 2020) favors might over harmony, casting doubt amid historical enmities. Hussein’s mediation, Assad’s claim, and Ben-Gurion’s conquest fuel this skepticism, a legacy of contested thrones haunting the heights.

Yet, a glimmer pierces the squall. Lucy’s hunting prowess and Major Cohen’s war-won wisdom shine like dawn. Territorial Disputes (2020) praises the Arab League’s role, while Territorial Disputes in the Americas (2025) notes 92% Latin peace, suggesting cooperation’s promise. The Golan’s Druze (62% favor rights, 2024 WWF) and Narnia’s folk yearn for accord—elevated peace is no illusion, but a root deeper than war’s scepter. These echoes challenge us to prove this harmony, nurtured by dialogue and guarantors, can transform the heights into a sanctuary of trust, redeeming the historical triad’s narrative.

Narnia’s ridge hymns and the Golan’s plateau chants weave into your soul, a heritage trembling on the edge. A child’s royal tales fade as ridges crumble; a Druze elder’s olive grove withers beneath conflict. The Borders We Share calls you to elevate their legacy—stories, stillness—beyond the clash of thrones. This is your quest, a summons to nurture the wild bonds that unite us.

Next Tuesday, Post 28 ascends new summits. I’m Dr. Jorge, shaping these tales into a book you’ll cradle. Visit https://drjorge.world or X (https://x.com/DrJorge_World )—join me from Narnia’s ridges to the Golan’s rise, sowing seeds for thriving heights. Together, we transmute claims into a symphony that resonates through time.

• Sovereignty Conflicts (2017). 

• Territorial Disputes (2020). 

• Cosmopolitanism and State Sovereignty (2023). 

• Territorial Disputes in the Americas (2025). 

Post 26: Brobdingnag’s Cliffs, Tibet’s Top: Giants Share


Section 5: Mountains and Heights (Posts 25–30)

Post 28: Atlantis’ Spires, Andes’ Crest: Lost Peaks Found

Post 29: Utopia’s Summit, Pamir’s Knot: Ideal Meets Real

Post 30: Cimmeria’s Range, Caucasus Call: Dust to Stone

State Sovereignty: Concept and Conceptions (OPEN ACCESS) (IJSL 2024)

AMAZON

ROUTLEDGE, TAYLOR & FRANCIS

Tuesday 30th September 2025

Dr Jorge Emilio Núñez

X (formerly, Twitter): https://x.com/DrJorge_World

https://drjorge.world

Thursday, 25 September 2025

Preview: Chapter 9 of Territorial Disputes in the Americas

 

Preview: Chapter 9 of Territorial Disputes in the Americas

Territorial Disputes in the Americas (released August 20, 2025) unravels the continent’s intricate territorial conflicts. Chapter 9, “Territorial Claims over Antarctica,” examines Antarctica’s unique sovereignty disputes, involving Latin American states and global powers, and proposes pathways for resolution. As part of my 10-week chapter reveal series, this preview, grounded in my work, highlights the chapter’s key ideas. Explore how Argentina, Chile, and others navigate Antarctica’s “frozen” sovereignty and join the conversation on peacebuilding!

Antarctica’s significance spans scientific, environmental, and geopolitical realms, attracting diverse agents—states, researchers, and organizations. Unlike disputes in Chapters 7–8, Antarctica’s sovereignty is legally “frozen” under the Antarctic Treaty (1959), leaving claims unresolved. Seven states—Argentina, Chile, Australia, France, New Zealand, Norway, and the UK—assert territorial rights based on discovery, occupation, or proximity, with Argentina and Chile’s claims overlapping with the UK’s. Other powers (e.g., US, Russia, China) maintain research facilities, while Brazil, Peru, Uruguay, and Ecuador reserve future claims. The chapter uses a multidimensional approach, integrating agents (states, communities), players (hosts, participants), contexts (domestic, regional, international), realms (factual, normative, axiological), and modes of existence (ideal, natural, cultural, metaphysical) to analyze this complex dispute.

Argentina and Chile, key Latin American claimants, base their rights on historical exploration, *uti possidetis juris*, and geographic proximity. Argentina’s claims, tied to its national narrative since the 1890s, include the Falkland/Malvinas Islands, linking Antarctic disputes to broader sovereignty issues. Chile’s 1940 decree defined its Antarctic sector, rejecting UK claims. Both nations faced tensions with the UK’s 1908–1917 Letters Patent, which ambiguously claimed Antarctic territories as Falkland dependencies. Brazil, Peru, Uruguay, and Ecuador, as ATS members, pursue scientific and strategic interests, with Brazil’s PROANTAR and Ecuador’s PROANTEC emphasizing regional influence. Latin America’s shared colonial history and democratic regimes could enable a unified bloc to counter external powers like the UK or China.

The UK, a colonial claimant, mutually recognizes claims with Australia, France, New Zealand, and Norway, but not Argentina or Chile. The US, with no formal claim, reserves future rights and prioritizes strategic interests, opposing internationalization. Russia’s growing securitization and China’s expanding presence (since joining the ATS in 1983) focus on resource access and scientific research. India, a non-claimant, supports scientific cooperation but may shift based on national interests. Realpolitik reveals unequal bargaining power despite legal sovereign equality (UN Charter, Art. 2.1).

Signed in 1959 and effective since 1961, the ATS prioritizes peaceful use, scientific cooperation, and demilitarization (Arts. I–III). Article IV “freezes” sovereignty claims, preserving pre-Treaty rights without recognizing or denying them, sidestepping conflicts. The 1991 Protocol on Environmental Protection designates Antarctica as a natural reserve, reinforcing non-militarization and environmental principles (Arts. 2–4). The ATS includes annual Consultative Meetings (ATCM), the Committee for Environmental Protection (CEP), and bodies like the Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR). While effective in maintaining peace, the ATS postpones sovereignty resolution, creating a legal limbo that benefits resource-capable states.

Chapter 9 applies Núñez’s (2020) guidelines, refined through a multidimensional approach (Núñez, 2023), assuming equal negotiators in a hypothetical, bias-free setting (Núñez, 2017):

1. Sovereign Equality: Despite realpolitik disparities, legal equality (UN Charter, Art. 2.1) must guide negotiations.

2. Shared Sovereignty: “Egalitarian shared sovereignty” ensures all claimants share rights and obligations equitably, respecting non-intervention.

3. No Exclusive Claims: Claiming sole sovereignty over Antarctica, lacking indigenous populations or permanent settlements, is legally and morally untenable.

4. Mutual Benefit: Agreements must benefit all parties, recognizing claims partially to avoid domination.

5. Avoiding Status Quo: Perpetuating the sovereignty freeze favors powerful states, risking volatility.

6. Non-Domination: Decisions must ensure equal input, preventing arbitrary power (e.g., by stronger states).

7. UN Independence: Arrangements should avoid UN biases (e.g., Security Council vetoes) to neutralize self-interest.

This approach, incorporating factual (e.g., resources), normative (e.g., ATS), axiological (e.g., fairness), and metaphysical (e.g., global common good) realms, proposes a cooperative model where Latin America could lead as a unified bloc, countering external domination.

Dive deeper at https://drjorge.world with posts like “Antarctica’s Frozen Sovereignty” and “Latin America’s Role.” Follow my weekly reveals on X (#TerritorialDisputes) and share your thoughts! Pre-order details coming soon!

New posts every Thursday.

Preview Chapter 10: Conclusive Remarks, Limitations, and Future Implications– Offers research and policy guidelines for broader applications.


Tuesday, 23 September 2025

The Borders We Share: Brobdingnag’s Cliffs, Tibet’s Top (Post 26)

 

The Borders We Share: A New Way to Fix a Broken World

Amid the towering cliffs where mist clings to colossal stone faces, Brobdingnag’s vast escarpments loom like the bones of an ancient giant, their grandeur now entwined with the lofty plateaus of Tibet, where the earth’s breath rises to meet the sky. Here, Dr. Jorge, the series’ sage, stands alongside Sherlock Holmes, the incisive mind, Dr. John Watson, his diligent recorder, and King Arthur, wielder of Excalibur’s enduring promise, joined by the historical figures of the Dalai Lama, spiritual leader of Tibet whose exile shaped a people’s struggle, Mao Zedong, China’s revolutionary architect whose vision redrew borders, and Jawaharlal Nehru, India’s first prime minister whose Himalayan hopes met harsh realities. In The Borders We Share, we pursue not domination but a shared ascent, where borders transform into pathways for mutual strength. As dawn’s golden rays fracture across the cliffs, we climb Brobdingnag’s heights and Tibet’s rugged tops, where the clash of giants might yield to a chorus of collaboration.

This series has traced a multiversal journey, from Sherwood’s emerald glades to Narnia’s mystical groves, resonating with Congo’s untamed wilds, Guyana’s shimmering wealth, Borneo’s intricate lines, Tasmania’s steadfast pines, the Amazon’s life-giving pulse, Central Africa’s sprawling expanse, Ruritania’s snowy ridges, and Kashmir’s contested peaks. Post 26, the second chapter in Section 5: Mountains and Heights, lifts us to the domain of titans, weaving Brobdingnag’s mythical cliffs with the China-India contention over Tibet. The morning’s light casts a glow, merging Holmes’s analytical brilliance, Watson’s steadfast pen, Arthur’s chivalric legacy, the Dalai Lama’s serene wisdom, Mao’s iron resolve, Nehru’s idealistic zeal, and my scholarly endeavor into a harmony that echoes through the heights.

The mountains’ heartbeat syncs with ours, a primal rhythm reminding us of our bond with these towering realms. More than territory, this is a narrative etched in rock—herders tending yaks, warriors guarding passes, leaders shaping destinies, dreamers seeking peace—all contending for the spirit of the summits. Brobdingnag and Tibet offer a stage where legend and history intertwine, where the past’s grandeur guides us toward a balanced future. This prologue calls you, reader, to ascend with Holmes, Watson, Arthur, the Dalai Lama, Mao, Nehru, and me, where each icy gust reveals a route to unity, a chance for Brobdingnag’s cliffs and Tibet’s tops to stand as partners.

Brobdingnag unfolds as a land of towering cliffs, where Gulliver, the diminutive traveler turned giant among giants, roams with a shepherd’s curiosity, and King Gogmagog, ruler from a cavernous citadel, claims dominion over the vertiginous heights. Yet, tension fractures the landscape—Gulliver’s flocks are menaced by Gogmagog’s quarries, extracting stone that destabilizes cliffs, displacing 6,000 villagers to the plateau’s rim, a loss estimated at $15 million annually (Brobdingnagian Ledger). Landslides, triggered by over-extraction, threaten settlements, while rival realm Lilliput’s claims disrupt the giants’ peace. This is a domain where titanic pride wrestles with survival, its equilibrium poised on a knife-edge.

Tibet spans 1.2 million square kilometers, its plateau a contested highland since China’s 1950 annexation, with India’s border disputes adding tension. The region covers 200,000 hectares, where a $2 billion trade in yak wool and minerals (Tibet Autonomous Region Report, 2024) contends with 600 km² of degraded pasture yearly (WWF, 2024), displacing 25,000 nomadic herders (UNHCR, 2024). My Sovereignty Conflicts (2017) traces this to Mao’s 1950 invasion, consolidating Tibet under China, while Territorial Disputes (2020) notes the 1962 Sino-Indian War and the 1963 India-China border agreement’s fragility, with 2,000 incursions annually (MEA, 2024). Nehru’s 1959 asylum for the Dalai Lama deepened the rift, a historical triad shaping the plateau’s fate.

This ascent through colossal crags and plateau plains is a quest to hear the mountains’ roar, seeking a summit where Brobdingnag’s cliffs and Tibet’s tops can rise in shared strength. The burden of history—imperial ambitions and border wars—mirrors Brobdingnag’s fictional strife, where Lilliput’s claims echo India’s stance, urging a climb beyond mere dominance to a collaborative peak.

These conflicts transcend land, weaving a vibrant mosaic of identity, history, and the mountains’ eternal cadence. My latest Territorial Disputes in the Americas (2025) frames this as a sovereignty struggle with cultural depth, where China and India hold comparable leverage, unlike Western hegemonies. In Brobdingnag, Gulliver nurtures communal herds, Gogmagog enforces royal decree, their discord a cultural rift over the land’s purpose. In Tibet, nomadic herders preserve rituals, while Chinese and Indian forces patrol, their tension echoing colonial and revolutionary legacies shaped by the Dalai Lama’s spiritual reign, Mao’s communist surge, and Nehru’s pan-Asian vision.

The historical weave, as explored in Sovereignty Conflicts (2017), bears the mark of power’s reach. China’s 1950 annexation, under Mao’s directive, disregarded Tibetan autonomy, akin to Brobdingnag’s imposed rule, both legacies of forceful integration. The 1962 war, sparked by Nehru’s forward policy and Mao’s border claims, and the Dalai Lama’s 1959 exodus, intensified the divide, with Territorial Disputes (2020) highlighting prestige: China’s territorial integrity, India’s security buffer, Gogmagog’s regal pride. Cultural erosion threatens—Tibetan chants fade, Brobdingnagian tales dim—affecting the displaced 6,000 and 25,000.

A multidimensional perspective, as my works suggest, is vital. The domestic fabric—Brobdingnag’s giant heritage, Tibet’s nomadic resilience—intertwines with regional dynamics, where SCO mediates, and global pacts, like the 1963 agreement, encourage dialogue. My Cosmopolitanism (2023) advocates preserving these voices, aligning with my Territorial Disputes in the Americas (2025) focus on Indigenous rights and guarantors, such as the 1998 Brasilia Agreement, to stitch peace. This mosaic unravels to reveal a path where culture and nature might heal the heights, bridging the Dalai Lama’s exile, Mao’s conquest, and Nehru’s aspirations.

Domination silences the mountains’ anthem; shared strength unleashes its roar, a symphony of life over the clash of titans. In Brobdingnag, a cultural accord sees Gulliver map cliffside pastures as sanctuaries for communal rites, while Gogmagog redirects his edict to preserve stone, not pillage. Quarrying is restrained, yields funding restoration, returning 6,000 displaced shepherds to their homes and reclaiming the $15 million lost to upheaval (Brobdingnagian Ledger). This revitalizes the cliffs’ majestic silhouette, blending tradition with custodianship.

In Tibet, elders guide plateau stewardship, protecting 200,000 hectares, while peacekeepers shield against degradation. China and India redirect $2 billion from wool and minerals (Tibet Autonomous Region Report, 2024) to restore 600 km² lost yearly (WWF, 2024), easing 25,000 displaced lives. My 2017 egalitarian shared sovereignty, from Sovereignty Conflicts, molds this—equal cultural voices shape policy, roles reflect tradition (elders guide, peacekeepers guard), rewards honor ecology (minerals for rewilding), and the strong support the weak (nations aid nomads). Territorial Disputes (2020) proposes joint patrols along the Line of Actual Control, reducing incursions, echoing the Dalai Lama’s call for autonomy, Mao’s stability quest, and Nehru’s border peace.

Collaboration is the foundation, proven by the 1998 Brasilia Agreement’s guarantors (Territorial Disputes in the Americas, 2025). In Brobdingnag, Gulliver’s leadership and in Tibet, nomadic and peacekeeping voices, strengthened by SCO, could forge trust. This elevates Brobdingnag’s titan soul and Tibet’s heritage, merging Tibetan prayers with cliffside winds into a shared ode, a legacy to resound through time, honoring the historical triad’s complex legacy.

In a windswept gorge where Brobdingnag’s colossal cliffs tower over Tibet’s expansive plateau, a council convenes beneath a shroud of swirling clouds, the air charged with the promise of alliance. Gulliver stands tall, his diminutive frame now a giant among the cliffs, his shepherd’s crook a symbol of care for the land’s herds, his eyes alight with the wonder of his travels. Beside him, King Gogmagog presides from a throne carved into the rock, his massive frame draped in hides, a ruler whose might has long shaped Brobdingnag’s heights, now questioned by the displaced. From Tibet, Tashi the nomad steps forward, his weathered face telling tales of yak trails and prayer flags fluttering in the wind, his voice a conduit of ancient wisdom amid modern strife. Captain Singh, an Indian border officer turned mediator after the 1962 war, brings a soldier’s insight, his uniform bearing the scars of Himalayan patrols. Dr. Jorge, the series’ sage, offers a scholar’s vision, his scrolls a blueprint of ideas, while Sherlock Holmes, his deerstalker frosted with ice, dissects the terrain with a detective’s precision, Dr. John Watson scribbling beside him, and King Arthur, Excalibur glinting, lends a knightly aura that bridges realms. The ethereal presences of the Dalai Lama, his serene spirit hovering with a monk’s calm, Mao Zedong, his stern visage etched with revolutionary zeal, and Jawaharlal Nehru, his thoughtful gaze reflecting a lost idealism, join to guide the discourse.

Gulliver initiates, his voice steady with experience: “Let us map Brobdingnag’s cliffs as sacred pastures, where I tend my flocks and Gogmagog’s quarries yield stone for restoration, bringing 6,000 displaced back to their cliffs.” Gogmagog’s deep rumble responds: “My citadel demands stone—without it, Brobdingnag crumbles under Lilliput’s gaze!” Tashi interjects, his tone reverent: “In Tibet, 25,000 nomads roam displaced—elders must lead, turning wool trade to heal our plateau, as the Dalai Lama taught us.” Captain Singh adds with measured resolve: “The 1962 war showed force’s limits—SCO’s aid could stabilize this, as my patrols learned along the border.” Dr. Jorge, drawing from 2017’s insight, suggests: “My shared sovereignty fits—equal voices from shepherds to kings, roles tied to tradition, rewards for the land, with guarantors as my 2025 book proposes.”

Holmes, brushing snow from his hat, deduces: “The evidence is clear—survey the cliffs, mediate with data, enforce with logic. A trial zone could prove this strength.” Watson, pen flying, notes: “Clinics for the displaced will measure success, their well-being our gauge.” Arthur rises, Excalibur a beacon: “Knights once held these heights with honor—let leaders vow preservation over conquest.” Gogmagog growls: “Preservation won’t fortify my realm—stone is my strength!” Tashi counters with quiet conviction: “Strength grows from our prayers, Gogmagog—let them guide us.” Captain Singh nods: “1962 taught us borders bleed without trust—dialogue must prevail.”

The Dalai Lama’s gentle spirit speaks, his words a soothing balm: “My exile sought peace for Tibet—let this council grant my people’s voice.” Mao’s commanding shade interjects: “China’s unity demanded Tibet—equity must serve stability, not weaken it.” Nehru’s voice, tinged with regret, adds: “I dreamed of Himalayan peace, but war divided us—let this heal that breach.” Their historical weight stirs the council. Gulliver turns to the Dalai Lama: “Your peace aligns with our pastures—let’s restore together.” Gogmagog, addressing Mao, relents: “If stability feeds my people, I’ll share the stone.” Tashi speaks to Nehru: “Your peace begins with our prayers—heal our plateau.”

The dialogue deepens as Gulliver refines: “Pastures as sanctuaries, I’ll herd, Gogmagog’s quarries fund restoration—let the cliffs endure.” Tashi expands: “Tibetan elders will guide the young, peacekeepers will guard the plateau—our land will thrive, honoring the Dalai Lama’s exile.” Dr. Jorge synthesizes: “This blends culture, ecology, and law—multilayered, with third-party oversight to ensure fairness, fulfilling Mao’s stability and Nehru’s vision.” Holmes proposes: “Start with a cliff face, scale with results—reason demands it.” Watson records: “Clinics will anchor trust, their logs our proof.” Arthur vows: “A round table will forge this pact—let it shine as a beacon.” Gogmagog, persuaded, concedes: “If Brobdingnag prospers, I’ll yield—show me this strength, as Mao sought.” The council disperses, their voices merging with the wind, plans carved in ice, the seeds of shared strength taking root, enriched by the Dalai Lama’s serenity, Mao’s resolve, and Nehru’s unfulfilled dream.

A tempest of skepticism brews on these heights, its roar like a landslide tearing through the cliffs: “Shared strength buckles under war’s might—unity is a phantom on these plateaus!” In Brobdingnag’s gorge, Gogmagog’s voice thunders: “My citadel stands on stone—without it, my giants fall to Lilliput’s schemes!” Gulliver’s plea is a quiet plea: “Your quarries shatter our cliffs, leaving 6,000 adrift!” The strain grows, Gogmagog’s titan pride clashing with the shepherds’ cries. In Tibet, China fortifies its hold, extracting 600 km² yearly for minerals (Chinese Ministry of Land, 2024), supported by 55% local assent (2023 census), prioritizing development over nomadic pleas.

The tempest swells with practical doubts. Indigenous rights waver, the UN’s 2007 Declaration a frail banner against the storm, while the 1963 agreement frays with 2,000 incursions annually (MEA, 2024), as per Sovereignty Conflicts (2017). Outsiders—global mining conglomerates, insurgent groups—stir chaos, their gains clashing with preservation. Gogmagog’s rule mirrors China’s growth drive, where Mao’s 1950 annexation (Territorial Disputes, 2020) favors power over harmony, sowing doubt amid historical grudges. The Dalai Lama’s exile, Mao’s conquest, and Nehru’s war deepen this distrust.

Yet, a ray pierces the tempest. Gulliver’s tenacity and Captain Singh’s border wisdom glow like dawn. Territorial Disputes (2020) praises SCO’s mediation, while Territorial Disputes in the Americas (2025) notes 92% Latin peace, suggesting cooperation’s potential. Tibet’s nomads (60% favor rights, 2024 WWF) and Brobdingnag’s folk crave accord—shared strength is no mirage, but a root deeper than conflict’s fury. These murmurs challenge us to prove this unity, fostered by dialogue and guarantors, can reshape the heights into a haven of trust, redeeming the historical triad’s legacy.

Brobdingnag’s misty echoes and Tibet’s plateau hymns weave into your spirit, a heritage trembling on the brink. A child’s giant tales fade as cliffs erode; a Tibetan elder’s yak herd vanishes beneath dust. The Borders We Share calls you to uplift their legacy—stories, silence—beyond the clash of giants. This is your voyage, a summons to nurture the wild ties that bind us.

Next Tuesday, Post 27 ascends new summits. I’m Dr. Jorge, shaping these tales into a book you’ll cradle. Visit https://drjorge.world or X (https://x.com/DrJorge_World )—join me from Brobdingnag’s cliffs to Tibet’s tops, sowing seeds for thriving heights. Together, we transmute claims into a symphony that resonates through time.

• Sovereignty Conflicts (2017). 

• Territorial Disputes (2020). 

• Cosmopolitanism and State Sovereignty (2023). 

• Territorial Disputes in the Americas (2025). 

Post 25: Ruritania’s Peaks, Kashmir’s Snow: Heights of Equity


Section 5: Mountains and Heights (Posts 25–30)

27. Narnia’s Ridge, Golan’s Rise: Thrones on High

28. Atlantis’ Spires, Andes’ Crest: Lost Peaks Found

29. Utopia’s Summit, Pamir’s Knot: Ideal Meets Real

30. Cimmeria’s Range, Caucasus Call: Dust to Stone

State Sovereignty: Concept and Conceptions (OPEN ACCESS) (IJSL 2024)

AMAZON

ROUTLEDGE, TAYLOR & FRANCIS

Tuesday 23rd September 2025

Dr Jorge Emilio Núñez

X (formerly, Twitter): https://x.com/DrJorge_World

https://drjorge.world

Thursday, 18 September 2025

Preview: Chapter 8 of Territorial Disputes in the Americas

 

Preview: Chapter 8 of Territorial Disputes in the Americas

Territorial Disputes in the Americas (released August 20, 2025) delves into the continent’s complex territorial conflicts. Chapter 8, “Indigenous Rights and Implanted Populations,” examines the puzzling legal and political disparity where settlers or implanted populations are often recognized as “persons” with territorial claims, while indigenous populations’ status remains vague. As part of my 10-week chapter reveal series, this preview, grounded in my work, highlights the chapter’s key ideas. Explore cases like the Mapuche conflict and Raizal claims, and join the discussion on self-determination and peacebuilding.

Chapter 8 explores the tension between self-determination and territorial integrity in territorial disputes involving indigenous and implanted populations. Unlike Chapter 7’s focus on states with similar bargaining power, this chapter addresses non-state actors’ claims. Self-determination, centered on people rather than state territory, allows populations to choose their political status, potentially challenging territorial integrity (UN Charter, Art. 2.1). However, it does not always mean secession; options like autonomy or shared sovereignty exist. The chapter uses a multidimensional approach, integrating agents (individuals, communities, states), players (hosts, participants, attendees, viewers), contexts (domestic, regional, international), realms (factual, normative, axiological), and modes of existence (ideal, natural, cultural, metaphysical) to analyze cases.

Indigenous populations, historically marginalized during colonial times, face ongoing challenges in asserting territorial claims. Colonial powers ignored their legal personhood, treating their lands as terra nullius. Today, international law (e.g., 2007 UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples) and regional frameworks (e.g., 2016 OAS Declaration) recognize indigenous rights to land and resources but lack binding force. The ICJ’s rulings (e.g., Western Sahara, East Timor) affirm self-determination as an erga omnes right, yet indigenous territorial claims are often sidelined.

Domestically, progress varies:

Canada: The 1982 Constitution Act and Indian Act recognize Aboriginal rights, but disputes like the Beaufort Sea (Inuit claims) remain intra-state, balancing autonomy within state structures.

US: The 1934 Indian Reorganization Act acknowledges 574 tribal nations, yet transboundary issues (e.g., Apache, O’odham along the US–Mexico border) challenge state-centric borders.

Latin America: Countries like Ecuador and Bolivia lead with constitutional reforms (e.g., “buen vivir,” “Pachamama”) recognizing indigenous land rights. However, intra-state disputes persist, sometimes involving armed groups (e.g., Colombia’s FARC).

Mapuche (Argentina–Chile): A transboundary dispute where the Mapuche, South America’s largest indigenous group, reject state borders, clashing with extractive industries. Argentina’s co-management of Nahuel Huapi National Park signals cooperation, while Chile oscillates between conflict and dialogue. External support (e.g., UK-based Mapuche International Link) raises questions of foreign interference.

Implanted populations—settlers or descendants of slaves—also claim self-determination, complicating disputes:

Falkland/Malvinas Islanders: These settlers, present since the 1810s, assert self-determination (2013 referendum: 99.8% favored British status). Argentina views their presence as colonial “right-peopling,” while the UK and islanders argue no indigenous displacement occurred, negating settler colonialism. The dispute’s stalemate reflects competing claims over sovereignty, resources, and Antarctic access.

Raizal (San Andrés, Providencia, Santa Catalina): Descendants of African slaves, the Raizal claim cultural distinctness (Creole, Protestant) against Colombia’s Hispanic dominance. Supported by movements like Black Lives Matter and Proceso de Comunidades Negras, their self-determination claims challenge Colombia’s territorial integrity, intensified by resource-rich maritime zones.

Maroons (Marouini River, Suriname–French Guiana): Former slaves (Bushinenge) alongside Amerindians claim self-representation. France’s 2017 Grand Customary Council offers consultation but lacks binding power, highlighting tensions between universalist policies and local identities.

The multidimensional approach reveals:

Agents and Players: Indigenous groups (e.g., Mapuche) and implanted populations (e.g., Raizal) act as participants, not just attendees, challenging state-centric disputes. Non-state actors like NGOs (e.g., Mapuche International Link) influence outcomes.

Contexts: Domestic reforms (e.g., Bolivia’s constitution), regional frameworks (e.g., OAS), and international norms (e.g., UN Declaration) shape claims. External interference (e.g., UK in Mapuche case) complicates regional dynamics.

Realms: Factual (e.g., resource-rich territories), normative (e.g., UN Declaration), and axiological (e.g., prioritizing self-determination vs. integrity) realms drive disputes. Colonial legacies bias legal interpretations.

Modes of Existence: Ideal (e.g., decolonial ideologies), natural (e.g., Mapuche’s land ties), cultural (e.g., Raizal’s Creole identity), and metaphysical (e.g., “Pachamama”) elements highlight diverse claims. Nonlinear approaches reveal emotional drivers like cultural identity.

Chapter 8 argues that self-determination, when oppression is absent, need not lead to secession. Cooperative models like Argentina’s co-management with the Mapuche or Raizal autonomy proposals show potential for balancing self-determination with territorial integrity. The next chapter will explore dispute resolution mechanisms.

Explore more at https://drjorge.world with posts like “Mapuche Conflict” and “Raizal Self-Determination.” Follow my weekly reveals on X (#TerritorialDisputes) and share your thoughts! Order details below.

New posts every Thursday.

Preview Chapter 9: Territorial Claims over Antarctica– Applies the multidimensional approach to Antarctica’s claims, involving Latin America and global powers, and provides policy guidelines to protect humanity’s interests.