** Principality of Sealand**
** Map**
** Overview and coinage**
** Photos of the “fortress”**
I have a feeling Cecil will know this one.
Well, here’s the story as far as I can remember. International law says a nation’s territory ends about three miles out to sea. During WWII, England built these big platforms in the Atlantic (sorta like oil platforms) that had big guns on them to shoot down airplanes. These were more than three miles off the coast.
International law also says that if you find something that’s been abandoned outside a nation’s territorial waters, it’s yours.
So technically, Sealand is certainly a sovereign nation. However, the British refuse to recognize it (don’t know what the word from the UN is) and they are trying to expand their territorial waters to include Sealand (even though every international convention seems to say that Sealand is its own country.)
Sealand has also completed some minor arms deals; they’ve even had to fight off pirates.
Last month’s issue of Wired had Sealand on the cover
**
You have the salvage rights. These are very different than Sovereign Nation status.
Ummmmm…sorry but that’s not right. Sovereign nation status is conferred by the United Nations under international law. You can declare yourself a soverign nation, or the son of God if you wish. but a gun platform in the Atlantic isn’t going to make the grade as either a nation or the Holy land.
I would disagree that the UN confers soverign nation status. Tiawain is cleary a sovereign nation, though not recognized by the UN
Also places like East Timor and Western Saharah are clearly under control of Indonesia and Morocco, though not recognized by the UN.
East Timor is no longer controlled by Indonesia.
picmr
Then you would be wrong. Here is an excerpt from the current CIA factbook:
http://www.odci.gov/cia/publications/factbook/tw.html#gov
Political pressure groups and leaders: Taiwan independence movement, various business and environmental groups
note: debate on Taiwan independence has become acceptable within the mainstream of domestic politics on Taiwan;
political liberalization and the increased representation of opposition parties in Taiwan’s legislature have opened public debate on the island’s national identity; advocates of Taiwan independence oppose the ruling party’s traditional stand that the island will eventually reunify with mainland China;
goals of the Taiwan independence movement include establishing a sovereign nation on Taiwan and entering the UN; other organizations supporting Taiwan independence include the World United Formosans for Independence and the Organization for Taiwan Nation Building.
If neither the Taiwanese, the US nor the UN think Taiwan is a sovereign nation, why do you?
That’s interesting.
If this is true, how is that Australia claims and forcibly maintains a 200 mile territorial waters zone around the Australian continent?
Why haven’t we been served a summons to appear at the Hague to explain our misconduct?
And here’s the article:
Do you think they can pull this off?
I think the British goverment will finally take some
steps…
I have some problem with the “sovereign nation” being that which is recognized by the UN. Example - the UN refuses to recognize the Taliban. Does that mean Afganistan is no longer a sovereign nation?
Sua
**
I don’t know why Markxxx thinks so, but I’ll tell you why I (unschooled in international politics though I am) think so, and probably why most people (well, most people who could find Taiwan on a map, which limits the pool somewhat) would think this way.
We call it the “duck test.” If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck and looks like a duck, you’re justified in considering it a duck.
Taiwan has controlled borders, a government and a foreign policy. It’s not governed by the laws of any other nation, though it occasionally makes noises about its right to govern all of China. It fulfills all of the criteria for nationhood other than recognition by other countries, and even that’s a bit of a wrinkle.
As I understand it, Taiwan’s current government was founded by middle- and upper-class Chinese fleeing the mainland one step ahead of the Ravening Communist Hordes™. Declaring themselves to be a soverign nation (and not, as they started off claiming, the legitimate government of all China) would be an admission that they have lost the mainland for good. So they haven’t wanted to be recognized as “the government of Taiwan,” and once the PRC was finally recognized as the legitimate government of China, they were left without a recognition to stand on.
What I think the CIA factbook you quoted was saying is that the younger generation, having grown up on Taiwain, doesn’t give a fig for the mainland, and thinks the hopes for reconquest are miniscule at best. So they’d rather be citizens of a real country than of what has more-or-less been a government in exile that happened to rule part of the country it was in exile from.
Technically, Taiwan is not a “country,” but all the other governments of the world treat it like it one. Heck, the USA (and most of the rest of the world, IIRC) didn’t recognize China until Nixon. Does that mean that one-fifth of the world’s population lived in anarchy for fifteen years? (And, please, no Great Leap Forward jokes.)
Da Ace has it. The only logical standard for “nationhood” is the Duck Test – ie, does the region in question operate like a sovereign nation? Recognition by the UN is a nice thing to have, but it’s not necessary by any stretch of the imagination.
Oh, and about Sealand: According to How to Start Your Own Country, a British court ruled that Sealand is outside of the country’s jurisdiction. This ruling was apparently never overturned or voided in any way, and it’s the basis of Sealand’s indepenence.
Sealand is interesting to me because it is unique and its situation cannot be duplicated.
Specifically, Roy Bates declared Sealand’s independence when the British territorial limit was three miles. Later it was extended to seventeen, but a court decided that Sealand was still outside of British jurisdiction by virtue of its declaration. So now Roy enjoys the free protection of the Royal Navy.
Also, the UN passed a resolution declaring that man-made structures at sea will not be considered sovereign. However, that resolution was passed long after Sealand had gone indie, so they have a case for being grandfathered. But no North Sea oil platform is going to get away with it again.
In the other threads cited above, you can find a lot more info, including a brief e-mail correspondence between me and Michael Bates, heir-apparent to the Sealand throne.
There’s also a little blurb in the latest edition of Time magazine regarding Sealand- and comparing it to a new docking station/apartment complex(?) being built out at sea.
If Sealand is an independent and sovereign nation, why does it have a United Kingdom address?