Thursday, 7 August 2025

Preview: Chapter 2 of Territorial Disputes in the Americas

Territorial Disputes in the Americas (releasing August 20, 2025) redefines how we understand conflicts across our continent. Chapter 2, “Sovereignty and Territorial Disputes,” explores the dynamic interplay between these concepts, challenging unidimensional views and advocating a multidimensional approach. As part of my 10-week chapter reveal series, this preview delves into the chapter’s key ideas, building on my work. Join me to rethink sovereignty, disputes, and peacebuilding in the Americas!

Redefining Sovereignty

Chapter 2 begins by redefining sovereignty, traditionally tied to territory but not exclusively so. Sovereignty encompasses population and government, crucial in disputes involving indigenous peoples, implanted populations, or conflicting state interests. Unlike conventional views in legal and political sciences that treat states as singular agents, the chapter highlights sovereignty’s non-absolute nature, enabling interrelations of domination or cooperation. It distinguishes three dimensions: factual (de facto) sovereignty (actual control over territory or people), normative (de jure) sovereignty (legal authority, e.g., Argentina’s claim to the Falklands/Malvinas despite UK control), and axiological (value) sovereignty (how agents perceive sovereignty, shaping inclusion or exclusion). For instance, colonial powers’ axiological choices, like the Inter caetera Papal bull, ignored indigenous rights, influencing modern disputes.

Understanding Territorial Disputes

The chapter defines territorial disputes narrowly as state disagreements over land or water, and broadly to include non-state agents (e.g., indigenous communities) and spaces like cyberspace. Disputes involve pluralisms—diverse agents (individuals, communities, states), roles (hosts, participants), and contexts (domestic, regional, international). Unidimensional analyses focusing on legal or political factors, such as strategic location or economic value, fail to capture their complexity. For example, the Caribbean Sea disputes (e.g., Guatemala-Belize) involve overlapping exclusive economic zones and new resource technologies, requiring a multidimensional lens to understand claims (e.g., historical, cultural, ideological) and issues at stake (e.g., bordering minorities, political unification).

Causes and Contexts of Disputes

Chapter 2 examines why disputes arise, persist, or resolve. While strategic location, economic value, or cultural ties with bordering minorities contribute, they don’t fully explain origins or escalation. Domestic contexts (e.g., Argentina’s national honor in the Falklands/Malvinas) influence regional and international dynamics, but international factors (e.g., military balance) don’t always explain origins. Conversely, local factors like colonial borders aren’t sufficient for escalation. Cases like the San Andrés dispute show how normative (legal claims), factual (resource exploitation), and axiological (Raizal identity) elements intertwine across contexts, demanding a holistic approach to uncover commonalities and solutions.

Regional Organizations and Peacebuilding

The chapter lists 16 regional organizations in the Americas (e.g., OAS, MERCOSUR, CARICOM) and their roles in conflict resolution. The Organization of American States (OAS) stands out, with its Charter (Articles 24–27) promoting peaceful procedures like negotiation, mediation, arbitration, and judicial settlement. However, limitations persist: negotiation requires consent, mediation depends on compromise, and arbitration lacks enforcement. The OAS Peace Fund has supported cases like Belize-Guatemala, but challenges remain when external powers (e.g., the UK in Falklands/Malvinas) or non-members are involved. Historical successes, such as the 1998 Brasilia Peace Agreement (Ecuador-Peru), highlight the role of regional guarantors (e.g., Argentina, Brazil), suggesting higher success rates when combined with local mechanisms.

A Multidimensional Path Forward

Chapter 2 argues that unidimensional approaches—focusing solely on legal or political aspects—yield incomplete analyses. A multidimensional approach, integrating factual, normative, and axiological dimensions across domestic, regional, and international contexts, better captures disputes’ intricacy. For example, the Guantanamo lease (Cuba-US) shows legal complexity, while indigenous claims challenge state-centric views. This framework sets the stage for subsequent chapters, exploring cases like the Amazon and Antarctica.

Get a Sneak Peek

Dive deeper into these ideas through my blog posts at https://drjorge.world , including “Territorial Disputes in the Americas: A Brief Multidimensional View” and “Antarctica.” Follow my weekly chapter reveals starting next week and join the conversation! Share your thoughts below or on X using #TerritorialDisputes. Pre-order details below.

NOTE:

New posts every Thursday.

Preview Chapter 3: Pluralism of Pluralisms and the Multidimensional Approach– Details disputes’ multi-subjective, multi-contextual nature, with linear and nonlinear dimensions.