In an earlier article, this publication highlighted the civilized norm that non-local people do not have a right to vote on whether a different location changes its political status by becoming independent or a state/province, or some other outcome. In other words, when Kosovo, Montenegro, Scotland, Quebec, and Puerto Rico vote on independence, citizens of the countries those localities vote to leave but outside of those localities do not have a right to participate in the vote.
Reprise of Self-Determination
Reprise of Self-Determination
Dictators such as Aliyev in Azerbaijan, however, demand that all Azeris should vote on whether part of Azerbaijan, the over 90% Armenian hills of Nagorno-Karabakh/Artsakh, become independent.
This principle, that non-locals have no right to vote on a locality’s political affiliation, sounds clear cut, but it actually is not so simple because how should the boundaries of a locality be defined? Water boundaries could provide the answer. Water boundaries would include of course bodies of water such as rivers, but also boundaries between watersheds, a.k.a. drainage basins, that run along high points of land like ridges.
All Boundaries Must Follow Water Features
All Boundaries Must Follow Water Features
Humanity has traditionally sometimes used such boundaries to define political units (mostly, major rivers serving as boundaries), but could do so more universally and explicitly in order to give space to political affiliations that will always change. Throughout human history, boundaries have constantly changed. The idea frozen in place by the United Nations that current political boundaries are inviolate is unworkable: Humanity has never sat still, so humanity needs a regime of international relations that gives space for boundaries to change through democratic vote.
Defining boundaries at bodies of water and watersheds provides a natural framework for humanity to agree on areas of land the people in which have a right to self-determination. Also, a previous article in this Non-Violence publication advocated giving people the right to vote to draw boundaries, not keeping that power in unelected bureaucracies. Restricting boundaries to water features provides an objective, reality-based foundation upon which to present a range of boundary decision choices regardless of whether the democratically decide those boundaries (which is ideal), or the current system of elites deciding boundaries continues.
Defining Water Features
Defining Water Features
Take a look at this simplified map of Puerto Rico showing only major rivers in blue, and also watershed boundaries in black which are in effect ridgelines along chains of mountains/hills.
Notice a trend in watershed shape: Major rivers form watershed regions that are widest in the middle, but narrow to almost just the banks of the river as the river approaches the ocean. All areas in the mountains are part of large watersheds. Coastal areas are dominated by small watersheds, many with no major rivers worth including on this map.
One Independent Watershed
One Independent Watershed
This Non-Violence publication’s Stakeholder Control vision advocates permitting anyone in any watershed, even a stream, to declare complete independence with a supermajority vote of residents of that watershed.
Independence: Half a Watershed
Independence: Half a Watershed
If residents want to use a river, stream, or lake as a boundary and declare independence on only one side of the river/stream/lake, then they may do so.
Non-Contiguous Countries
Non-Contiguous Countries
This publication advocates that even non-contiguous territories can unite into one country. A future article will delve into why two territories might want to unite or divide.
Waterline Boundaries for Provinces Within Countries
Waterline Boundaries for Provinces Within Countries
This Non-Violence publication also advocates permitting residents of a watershed to reorganize within a sovereign country. The territory would remain part of the larger country, but becoming their own province/state, or their own county/town/city, or joining another province, state, county, town, or city.
Let us take a hypothetical independent, sovereign country that unites the Río Grande de Arecibo watershed and separate two coastal watersheds near to but separate from the mouth of that river: one to the west side encompassing Arecibo City, and the other on the east side encompassing Arecibo Airport and a university.
Let us suppose that initially, in this Arecibo Country, the Airport/University watershed area is in the same province as the watershed area of the whole Río Grande de Arecibo. Let us also suppose that the separate watershed around Arecibo City is in a different province:
Watersheds Can Switch Provinces
Watersheds Can Switch Provinces
Let us then suppose that the watershed around the Airport/University dislikes having to wrangle in the same province with the non-coastal inland residents of the larger Río Grande de Arecibo watershed. The Airport/University area wants to instead join in a united province with the nearby coastal city province encompassing the watershed around Arecibo City. If a supermajority of residents in the watersheds around the Airport/University , and separately a supermajority of residents in the watershed around Arecibo City, vote to do so, then the provincial map would change to look like this:
Or Just Become an Independent Country Instead
Or Just Become an Independent Country Instead
Or, if the people of the watershed around the Airport/University would rather just form their own separate, independent country, they could just do that instead:
80% Supermajority
80% Supermajority
On one hand, this article advocates that the civilized world tolerate people peacefully leaving to form their own country with just a vote. Countries like Spain should allow regions like Catalonia and the Basque Country to vote on independence. This Stakeholder Control vision would balance this increased permissiveness by raising the threshold to change political allegiance from a bare majority to a supermajority.
This Stakeholder Control vision has advocated for a higher 80% threshold in other circumstances, (the 80% threshold to change a dividend-paying public trust fund) and does so the same in this instance.
The Vision
The Vision
This article merely introduces some of the mechanics for how humanity can construct a framework for continuous, peaceful sovereignty realignments. It is absurd that modern international law expects borders to remain the same. Humanity needs a peaceful way for borders to change. This waterlines idea presents one such way forward.
_______________
Support Non-Violence writing by tipping me at Ko-Fi.com, or by donating some Ethereum digital currency to this public address! 0x5ffe3e60a7f85a70147e800c37116b3ad97afd5e
Filter By:
