That wasn't the point of my post. I was addressing the contention that the idea of jurisdictional sovereignty is somehow primarily an American idea. It most certainly isn't. And of course, Grand Lodges can agree to share a jurisdiction, it happens all over the world.
Well the point of my post is that it is primarily an American doctrine (exclusive jurisdiction) when used to deny another grand lodge recognition when the primary reason they exist is due to the past actions of said grand lodge.