Most - if not all - conflicts in international relations have - to an extent - something to do with sovereignty. On the theoretical side, we learn at University that either considered as a strong concept or one that has lost relevance, it is still discussed. On the practical side, the prerogatives a State has over its people and territory appear to be the highest. Within these ideal and real backgrounds, there are various sovereignty disputes around the world that struggle between legal and political limbo, status quo and continuous tension with various negative consequences for all the involved parties (e.g. violation of human rights, war, arms trafficking, only to name a few). It is increasingly clear that the available remedies have been less than successful, and a peaceful and definitive solution is needed. This thesis proposes a fair and just way of dealing with certain sovereignty conflicts. Part One presents the core argument to work out the structure upon which this thesis will be developed. There is a traditional idea that sovereignty must be unshared and unlimited. I argue that in actual fact both in theory and in practice sovereignty is always limited. Thereby, I consider how shared sovereignty is possible—how a State can limit itself and stay sovereign. Chapter One, the Introduction, presents the basic constitutive elements of this thesis. Chapter Two examines if sovereignty can be (in fact, may actually be) limited, and therefore can be shared. To show this I use both criticism of the best known theories of sovereignty and investigation of the historical facts. Part Two explores the minimum elements that must be acknowledged conceptually, legally and realistically in order to give flesh to shared sovereignty and the way it needs to work if we want a peaceful understanding amongst the parties concerned. Chapter Three appraises ‘shared sovereignty’ and similar expressions used in political and legal literature. In order to do that, I show which notions of shared sovereignty are not relevant. Chapter Four examines how a relevant notion can be developed, using the analogy of self-ownership. Chapter Five discusses the main remedies applied at international level in sovereignty issues and why proposed alternatives to shared sovereignty will not solve the problem. Part Three considers how distributive justice theories can be in tune with the concept of sovereignty and explores the possibility of a solution for sovereignty conflicts. I argue that shared sovereignty can be that solution based on Rawlsian principles. Chapter Six introduces and explores a new conception of shared sovereignty. Chapter Seven evaluates what sorts of institutions and arrangements could, and would best, realise shared sovereignty so defined by showing in outline how it might be applied to territory, population, government and law. Chapter Eight brings together the main points of this thesis, and shows possible further implications.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:bl.uk/oai:ethos.bl.uk:603256 |
| Date | January 2014 |
| Creators | Nunez, Jorge Emilio |
| Contributors | Lesser, Anthony; Reiff, Mark |
| Publisher | University of Manchester |
| Source Sets | Ethos UK |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Electronic Thesis or Dissertation |
| Source | https://www.research.manchester.ac.uk/portal/en/theses/shared-sovereignty-in-a-two-state-context-a-problem-of-distributive-justice(0c4e985d-1530-4188-8c9e-a99c6c66ac16).html |
Page generated in 0.0025 seconds