Countries that were federations for a very long time

Devdas

Ad Honorem
Apr 2015
4,718
India
#21
Switzerland and Germany. Argentina, Brazil, Mexico, Colombia, Venezuela and possibly Peru all have constitutions modeled on the US with semi autonomous states, at least in law if not always in fact. India's states are also semi autonomous. Russia calls itself the Russian Federation.
In India, only Kashmir had semi autonomous status. Federal model was inspired by America.
 
Likes: Futurist

Devdas

Ad Honorem
Apr 2015
4,718
India
#23
If it wasn't for US influence, do you think that India would have become a unitary state?
Unitary state would have created chaos. Population is huge and people speak various languages. In 1950s, demand for language dominant states was quite strong, first such movement was creating a Telugu state out of Tamil majority Madras.
 
Likes: Futurist

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
21,200
SoCal
#24
Unitary state would have created chaos. Population is huge and people speak various languages. In 1950s, demand for language dominant states was quite strong, first such movement was creating a Telugu state out of Tamil majority Madras.
So, an independent India was always destined to become a federal-style South Asian version of the EU?
 

stevev

Ad Honorem
Apr 2017
3,454
Las Vegas, NV USA
#25
In India, only Kashmir had semi autonomous status. Federal model was inspired by America.
By "semi-autonomous" I mean the states/provinces, etc have limited sovereignty under a federal structure. I understand Kashmir was demoted to what would be called a territory in the US. It has no vote in the legislature and is directly supervised by the central government.
 

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
21,200
SoCal
#26
By "semi-autonomous" I mean the states/provinces, etc have limited sovereignty under a federal structure. I understand Kashmir was demoted to that would be called a territory in the US. It has no vote in the legislature and is directly supervised by the central government.
I thought that Kashmir does, in fact, have representation in the Indian Parliament?
 

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
21,200
SoCal
#27
Pakistan-controlled Kashmir, on the other hand, has no representation in the Pakistani Parliament. This should change as soon as possible, IMHO.
 

Shaheen

Ad Honorem
May 2011
2,562
Sweden
#30
Yes, but I haven't actually heard of India stripping Kashmir of its parliamentary representation.
It has been turned into a "union territory" which places it under direct control of New Delhi (Union territory - Wikipedia ) and a state appointed "governor". I think they will still have parliamentary representation, but under federal control. As for Pakistani Kashmir, constitutionally the regions (Azad Kashmir and Gilgit Baltistan) are not part of Pakistan. Azad Kashmir has its own parliament, which has domestic control (although foreign policy and military are under Pakistans control until the wider Kashmir issue is resolved).

Personally I want them to have representation in the Pakistani parliament as well but that would result in India claiming Pakistan is going against UN resolutions by constitutionally integrating parts of Kashmir into Pakistan. Since a plebiscite will go either in Pakistans favor or an independent Kashmir (which due to its ethnicity, culture and religion will inevitably be close to Pakistan), Pakistan does not want to give up on this possibility.
 
Likes: Futurist