I have recently argued that permanent sovereignty is a serious obstacle to justice (e.g. from a global egalitarian point of view). But for Leif Wenar, the idea that natural resources belong to 'the people' is a critical tool which might offer a greater chance of easing poverty and inequality than more ambitious but less certain egalitarian reforms. Moreover Wenar reminds us that permanent sovereignty is something the poor countries of the world fought for, and this too might give egalitarians pause for thought. In this paper I assess the place Wenar-type reforms might play in an egalitarian argument. I argue that they might be a supplement to, but cannot be a replacement for, more ambitious egalitarian reforms. Moreover I argue that the supposed methodological / pragmatic advantages Wenar claims for his proposals do not exist. As such, egalitarians can set about attacking permanent sovereignty with renewed vigour
