In the United States, political factions are often categorized by terms such as Democratic versus Republican or liberal versus conservative. Conversely, in Puerto Rico, the political schisms are more likely to arise among pro-statehood, “Commonwealth,” and independence parties. However, akin to voters in the states identifying as libertarian, progressive, or socialist, Puerto Rican voters may also adopt various political labels. One such label is “sovereigntist.” Advocates of sovereigntism may hold diverse perspectives on the ideal future for Puerto Rico, yet all are unified in their desire to dissolve the colonial ties between the United States and Puerto Rico.
Defining sovereigntism
Sovereigntism generally advocates for independence and the self-determination of nations, but may also encompass critical views of international entities like the United Nations or domestic movements such as feminism. Typically, the core principle revolves around a “Don’t Tread on Me” resolve to secure or uphold ultimate authority within a nation. Sovereigntists often highlight the significance of national self-determination, cultural heritage, and economic autonomy.
Sovereigntism in Puerto Rico
In Puerto Rico, the term sovereigntism frequently indicates support for some variant of independence, with or without a free association agreement. It can imply an enhanced perception of support for various forms of sovereignty.
Although sovereigntists may back free association, it is perhaps ironically noted that the Freely Associated States of Palau, the Marshall Islands, and the Federated States of Micronesia are technically independent nations without complete sovereignty. The United States maintains sovereignty over their military and national security policy choices.
U.S. Military Authority in the Freely Associated States
Some advocates of free association in a newly sovereign Puerto Rico have continued to support the former concept of “enhanced commonwealth,” which has lost credibility in recent times. The way these individuals describe free association closely mirrors the traditional descriptions of “commonwealth.” Proponents of this stance may believe that it would be possible to negotiate a Compact of Free Association that would include, as the earlier notions of enhanced commonwealth did, assured U.S. citizenship and American financial assistance, while simultaneously allowing for international trade authority and the ability to selectively apply U.S. federal laws within its territory.
The experiences of the three existing freely associated states illustrate that this is not what the reality of free association with the United States entails.
Independence and Sovereign Free Association: What’s the Difference?
Autonomy versus sovereignty
As highlighted by Columbia professor Christina Duffy Ponsa, the sovereigntist stance has its historical origins in the autonomist movement, which sought an alternative to independence from Spain by advocating for becoming an autonomous region of Spain. Statehood constitutes the closest equivalent to that concept for a U.S. territory. U.S. states possess sovereignty, making decisions not dictated by the U.S. Constitution, thus determining matters like language, education, property taxes, and more within their jurisdictions. States enjoy significant rights and obligations.
Puerto Rico’s autonomists recognized this and formed the backbone of the statehood movement. Many contemporary proponents of statehood still regard statehood as synonymous with sovereignty, though this group does not typically associate itself with the term “sovereigntists.”
The post Puerto Rico Sovereigntism appeared first on PUERTO RICO REPORT.
