2021GeopoliticsOpen access

Westphalian Vs. Indigenous Sovereignty: Challenging Colonial Territorial Governance

Harald Bauder, Rebecca Mueller

Open full text 79 citations

Abstract

The Westphalian concept of sovereignty frames international relations and law. Since the 2007 UN Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, the notion of Indigenous sovereignty has also entered international political debate. In this article, we examine the underlying premise of Westphalian and Indigenous sovereignties. A scoping review of the literature reveals that Westphalian sovereignty is a Eurocentric concept implicated in the colonialisation of Indigenous peoples in settler societies. Conversely, Indigenous sovereignty is a broader idea that involves social and cultural aspects, recognises the interdependencies between political actors and relationships to the land, and acknowledges the contextualised nature of sovereignty. We suggest that the two conceptions of sovereignty cannot be reconciled with each other. However, in a shifting political terrain, Indigenous sovereignty poses a critical challenge to the Eurocentric definition of sovereignty.

Open-access reader

About this research paper

What this paper is about

The Westphalian concept of sovereignty frames international relations and law. Since the 2007 UN Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, the notion of Indigenous sovereignty has also entered international political debate. In this article, we examine the underlying premise of Westphalian and Indigenous sovereignties. A scoping review of the literature reveals that Westphalian sovereignty is a Eurocentric concept implicated in the colonialisation of Indigenous peoples in settler societies. Conversely, Indigenous sovereignty is a broader idea that involves social and cultural aspects, recognises the interdependencies between political actors and relationships to the land, and acknowledges the contextualised nature of sovereignty. We suggest that the two conceptions of sovereignty cannot be reconciled with each other. However, in a shifting political terrain, Indigenous sovereignty poses a critical challenge to the Eurocentric definition of sovereignty.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 79 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

The Westphalian concept of sovereignty frames international relations and law. Since the 2007 UN Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, the notion of Indigenous sovereignty has also entered international political debate. In this article, we examine the underlying premise of Westphalian and Indigenous sovereignties. A scoping review of the literature reveals that Westphalian sovereignty is a Eurocentric concept implicated in the colonialisation of Indigenous peoples in settler societies. Conversely, Indigenous sovereignty is a broader idea that involves social and cultural aspects, recognises the interdependencies between political actors and relationships to the land, and acknowledges the contextualised nature of sovereignty. We suggest that the two conceptions of sovereignty cannot be reconciled with each other. However, in a shifting political terrain, Indigenous sovereignty poses a critical challenge to the Eurocentric definition of sovereignty.

Key concepts: Westphalian sovereignty, Sovereignty, Indigenous, Politics, Political science, Colonialism, International relations, International law

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Westphalian Vs. Indigenous Sovereignty: Challenging Colonial Territorial Governance — Research Paper | ScholarLens