This paper compares and contrasts dynamics of territorial politics in South Asia and the extent to which the degree of self-rule, shared rule and symbolic recognition has been constrained by prevailing notions of state-led or state nationalism. across those countries. The paper compares and contrasts India, Pakistan and Sri Lanka. It demonstrates how in India the displacement of an integrationist with a majoritarian form of state nationalism has reduced the ability of states to exercise their autonomy and leverage influence at the centre. Similarly it shows how dominant nationalism in Pakistan curbed the decentralizing intent of the 18th constitutional amendment, upholding a more centralised arrangement in practice. Finally it demonstrates how majoritarian nationalism in Sri Lanka has precluded 'devolution within a unitary state' The paper charts similarities (significance of majoritarianism) and differences between those cases and the extent to which territorial arrangements in form and practice have been affected by increasing authoritarianism (all three cases) and militarisation (Pakistan and Sri Lanka). Indeed, it argues for an at best weak correlation between regime type and support for decentralisation, with electoral dynamics often underscoring support for majoritarian ideologies and parties.
