Data Sovereignty as an Architectural Constraint
Data sovereignty has long been treated as a compliance topic. The treatment is accurate but incomplete. Compliance frameworks document the commitment. Architecture determines whether the commitment can be kept. The distinction is structural. Compliance achievements can be documented, certified, and renewed annually. Architectural commitments are designed in and become harder to change with every service, dataset, and integration that depends on them. Organizations that maintain rigorous compliance and weak architectural sovereignty share a common position: the documentation passes audit, and the architecture cannot be moved. ...