When you think about countries, you likely imagine nations like the United States, Japan or Brazil. But little do you know there exist minuscule “nations” inside or between actual countries. They’re known as micronations, and they raise intriguing issues about what constitutes a country in international law. Is it as easy for someone to declare independence in their backyard? In fact, have these small entities any pretense to legal status? It’s time to wade through the murky waters of micronations and where they fit in the grand scheme of international law.
What Are Micronations?
Micronations are essentially what it says on the tin: self-declared independent states not formally recognized by any country in the world, but that still behave as such. Imagine them as locations where individuals or small groups declare themselves independent, establish their own flags and constitutions — sometimes print their currency and stamps.
Among the more famous examples are Sealand, a World War II sea fort near England that declared independence in 1967 and ceased to exist after 2020; and the Principality of Hutt River in Australia, which was around from 1970 until last year. These were countries in miniature, replete with royalty or government and citizenry.
The distinction between micronations and “real” countries is one of recognition. Micronations may behave like nations, but they are not internationally recognized sovereigns. This denial of recognition leads to very interesting legal problems and to issues upon which the rest of international law has some statements to make.
The Four Ingredients of Sovereignty
To understand why micronations have trouble getting recognition, we must begin by examining what it takes under international law to be a sovereign state. The 1933 Montevideo Convention sets out four criteria that an entity must satisfy to be regarded as a state:
Permanent Population
A state has to have people who reside in it permanently. That’s not to say the population has to be large, but it has to be stable and sustained. A lot of micronations have a tough time with that stipulation because they’re usually made up of a single family or a few supporters who don’t really spend most, or even any, of their time on their claimed land.
Defined Territory
There should be some area of land which the state claims as its dominion. The boundaries need not be rigorously defined, but there must be a clear region of undoubted state governance. Some micronations assert themselves over derelict sea platforms, no-man’s land between states or even their personal property.
Government
A government must also be able to govern territory and people. That is, some sort of government, laws and the means to enforce those laws over a territory. Some micronations form intricate systems of government that may consist, to varying degrees, of elements inspired by traditional government (such as presidencies or parliaments) in their actual organization.
Ability to Treat with Other States
The entity should have diplomatic relations and be able to sign a treaty with external countries. This is also by far the most difficult requirement for micronations as it entails being acknowledged and accepted by the rest of the world.
Recognition: The Make-or-Break Factor
Even if a micronation satisfies all four Montevideo criteria, it must be recognized by other states to have any hope of functioning as a genuine country. Recognition is a political and legal act, by which existing states acknowledge overtures from a new state that shows sovereignty in being.
This is where micronations run into a major bump in the road. Territorial nations are unlikely to grant recognition to micronations for a number of reasons:
First, recognition could spur separatist movements on their own soil. Especially if Country A accepts a micronation created on private land, what’s to prevent citizens of Country A from doing the same thing?
The second factor is that it challenges the territorial integrity of current states. Nearly all micronations are situated in the acknowledged territory of a separate nation. Acknowledging them would be to acknowledge that a portion of an existing state is no longer under its control.
Third, there may be practical issues in manipulating many small objects. The global structure functions better with a limited number of recognized nations. Hundreds or thousands of micronations would simply lead to administrative chaos.
The Legality Piece: Where Micronations Really Sit
According to current international law, micronations are regarded as a legal impossibility. They are not recognized as sovereign states, and do not have the rights or protections that actual countries have. Here’s what that means on the ground:
No International Legal Personality
Micronations may not enter into treaties or become members of international organizations, such as the United Nations, or be party to any other act of public international law. They are extralegal of the law of nations.
Subject to Local Laws
In spite of their ostensible independence, however, micronations are often still subject to the laws of the countries they claim to be independent from. If a micronation is located on private property in the United States, then U.S. federal, state and local laws still apply to that land — and the people who are on it.
No Diplomatic Protection
People from micronations cannot request for diplomatic protection while traveling outside of it. They are dependent on the passports and protections of states that countries acknowledge.
Tax and Legal Obligations Continue
No, hanging a flag from the roof of your house doesn’t magically remove your house or business from tax rolls and/or police regulations. Laws, taxes and crimes made against the micronation territory by government authorities whose actual country you live in are still subject to enforcement.
Comparing Micronations to Other Entities
To understand how micronations fit within the legal landscape, it is useful to compare them with other classes of entities:
| Entity Type | International Recognition | Sovereignty | Example |
|---|---|---|---|
| State | Full recognition | Independent | France, Peru, Thailand |
| Partially Recognized State | Some recognition | Disputed | Somaliland, Kosovo |
| Autonomous Region | No independent recognition | Limited autonomy | Euskadi (Basque), Iraqi Kurdistan |
| Indigenous Nation | Growing recognition | Varies by nation | Navajo Nation |
| Micronation | No official international status | None | Sealand |
According to this table, micronations do not hold any legal status in the international system.
Do Micronations Have Any Rights?
Although they are not recognized as sovereign states, micronations have human rights and those who form or belong to micronations are still citizens/nationals of some (usually recognized) country:
Freedom of Expression
People have a right to that opinion, maybe create symbolic nations as such in protest or art. Many micronations exist as little more than political statements, or even works of art, and not as serious endeavors to claim independent status.
Property Rights
Private land and property law. Since the concept of sovereign territory itself is evident, any micronation that exists on someone’s property, the owner retains the rights to their property as per the laws applicable in that region. However, ownership doesn’t grant sovereignty.
Right to Self-Determination
International law acknowledges the right of peoples to self-determination, but this is limited to certain groups (e.g., colonized peoples or oppressed minorities) in limited situations. It does not grant individuals or small groups an absolute right to create new states.
Cultural and Social Rights
Some people and groups use them to evoke a sense of fantasy or idealized community; some see in them an opportunity for experimentation with new political ideas. Communities can and do form, interests are shared, new cultures arise with the lack of political recognition as a state.
Past Cases: When Micronations Ran Aground on the Law
Several micronations have attempted to test their claims to sovereignty on the battlefield or by declaring war against established nations:
The Principality of Sealand
Sitting on an old World War II sea platform in the North Sea, Sealand has been asserting its independence since 1967. British courts determined that they did not have jurisdiction over the platform because it had been outside territorial waters at the time of occupation. (But that doesn’t mean Britain ever considered Sealand a sovereign state.) Amendments to ocean law later expanded British territorial waters to encompass the platform’s location, but enforcement has been sparse.
The Principality of Hutt River
This Australian micronation was founded on a wheat farm in 1970 and existed until 2020. The founder leveraged the legal arguments over government quotas to proclaim independence. For decades, Australian authorities more or less ignored it, regarding it as little more than a curiosity. Unpaid taxes were chased up by tax authorities and the principality officially capitulated in 2020. This case showed that tolerance does not mean recognition.
The Republic of Minerva
In 1972, a libertarian businessman tried to create a nation on coral reefs in the Pacific Ocean by dumping sand onto its surface so it would be above ocean level. The neighboring Kingdom of Tonga also claimed the reefs, however neither their claim or that of Minerva was supported by any other power. This case was evidence of the fact that even true no man’s lands would not inevitably form a new state without recognition by other nations.
The Role of Territorial Integrity
Territorial integrity — the principle that existing countries have the right to keep their borders intact, and not be carved up into pieces — is one of the most robust principles in international law. This effectively secures the new states from external aggression as well as secession from within.
The United Nations Charter emphasizes territorial integrity, and all international courts uphold it. This represents a formidable barrier to micronations, since recognizing them would imply a change of national boundaries inside of the nations that recognize them.
There have been some exceptions when the international community has backed secession, like South Sudan’s 2011 independence from Sudan after decades of civil war and a referendum. But these are cases of large numbers of people with grave human rights concerns and wide international support — none of which applies to micronations.
Micro Nations vs. Indigenous Sovereignty
There is a huge difference between micronations and indigenous sovereignty struggles. The land rights of Indigenous peoples have also been increasingly acknowledged in international law and, amongst others, the 2007 United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.
At the time colonization began, many indigenous nations held sovereignty, and international law has more recently accepted their retention of separate political, legal, economic, social and cultural institutions. Many indigenous nations do not have complete independence, but they wield significant autonomy within broader states.
This is in stark contrast to micronations, which are often new entities generated exclusively for the novelty. The former claims are derived from already-existing people, whereas the latter claims exist due to technology and a group of people who design themselves-such as when styles and taste change.
Why Some People Create Micronations
Yet despite the legal obstacles, people are inspired to form their own micronations for a number of reasons:
Political Protest
Some micronations sprout as protests against government decisions. The founders could take issue with tax systems, regulations or political decisions. And it is a dramatic form of resistance to declare independence.
Artistic Expression
Artists and entertainers occasionally undertake their own exercises in the form of conceptual art projects by establishing micronations to challenge notions of what a state is, borders and nationality. These are not intended to be taken literally, but rather to stimulate thought and conversation.
Community Building
Micronations can be fun community projects where people with similar interests invent their own culture, traditions and social norms. These are more akin to clubs or hobbyist organizations than serious political movements.
Libertarian Experiments
Some honest believers actually want to build those societies free of government. They look to micronations as a chance to experiment with alternative political and economic systems grounded in individual independence.
Tourism and Economics
Some micronations have issued tourism industry (dollar-store) passports, and souvenir stamps and currency. And although they’re not legally binding, they can earn money.
Micronations in International Law and the Future of Micronations
Because it’s also unlikely that the legal situation of micronations will ever be transformed drastically in the short-term. The international system is based on according recognition to a limited number of predominantly sovereign states, and it is wary of fragmenting existing countries into smaller ones.
And yet there are a few developments that might make us rethink the idea of micronations:
Digital Nations
Technology makes possible new kinds of community that are not based on geographical space. Some envision building “nations” that have no physical counterparts, complete with digital currencies and virtual governance. These beg new questions about whether territory is indeed a necessary component of statehood in the digital age.
Seasteading
Supporters of seasteading are advocating the construction of floating cities in international water that is beyond any country’s jurisdiction. If successful, such efforts would have better legal claims to sovereignty than land-based micronations, but they would also require international recognition to act as states.
Space Colonization
As people colonize space, similar issues of sovereignty on other planets or in orbital stations will arise. Existing space treaties ban countries from claiming celestial bodies, but future settlements might lead to new types of governance that are not accounted for by today’s international law.
Climate Change Impacts
Sea-level rise could inundate some island nations, spawning refugees and questions about what it means to be a state when the territory on which that state exists is gone. That could prompt new thinking on the relationship between statehood and geopolitical territory.
What This Means for Us Normies
In the case of micronations, the legal status is probably somewhat less important than other conceptions. But it does impart important lessons about the way international law operates:
Government power is derived from the acknowledgment of other governments, rather than simply from announcing that you are in charge. The foundation of the international system is respect and cooperation among sovereign states.
Sovereignty has real meaning, and therefore can’t be purely symbolic. The nationality of being a nation-state may be ascertained in international law.
Rights belong to individuals, not states. You don’t have to create your own country in order to exercise rights that everyone else has, including free speech, assembly, and cultural expression.
There is a difference between property ownership and the political sovereignty. To own land is to have property rights in it, not a right to found a new country on that land.
The Bottom Line
Micronations occupy an interesting space outside of the construct of international law. For all the trappings of statehood they might possess — flags, governments, currencies and even some armed forces — they do not have the thing that matters: recognition by other states.
In the present day, international law does not have a standard definition for micronations as sovereign entities. They are precluded from signing treaties, joining intergovernmental organizations or invoking the protections real countries have available to them. The people are entitled as citizens of their recognized countries, however the micronations with which that population derives nationality from isn’t.
Does that mean micronations are empty of meaning? They’re good thought experiments, as well as fun exercises in creativity and even occasionally effective criticism of current political systems. They force us to consider what makes a nation legitimate — and whether our current system of states is the only or best means of organizing human societies.
For now, however, the response from international law is straightforward: micronations might be entertaining or interesting — or annoying, depending on your perspective — but they do not have the sovereign status that entitles them to legal rights protection under international law.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is it legal for me to make my own micronation?
You can tell your property it’s a micronation in the name of free speech, but you cannot legally withdraw from your country. You will still be bound by all local, state and federal laws, and you must keep paying taxes and adhering to regulations.
Has there been any micronation to get recognition?
No contemporary micronation has been recognized as a sovereign state by the international community. While there have at times existed nations that emerged from secession (such as South Sudan), these were not micronations but clear cases of large-scale separatist movements, which transcended the limits of local or regional grievances and had widespread international support.
Do micronation passports work for travel?
No, micronation passports are not legally recognized. They would not be accepted by immigration officials for travel abroad. You need to hold an accepted passport.
What will happen if, after declaring a micronation, you didn’t pay taxes to your real country?
You will be chased by the taxmen for non payment of your taxes just like any other citizen. Some micronations have been threatened with legal action over not paying taxes.
Why doesn’t the UN favor micronations?
The UN admits only sovereign states as members, and admission depends on the applicant receiving approval from existing member states. Micronations do not qualify as states and lack the backing required for United Nations membership.
Is it possible for one micronation to have treaties with other ones?
Micronations will occasionally enter into ceremonial or non-legalistic alliances, which do not have the status of international law. Only sovereign states can conclude legally binding international treaties.
Is Sealand a real country?
The Principality has its own constitution and government (monarchical) but it is not an internationally recognized sovereign state. It has been described as independent or a micronation largely on personal preferences of who you ask about it. It continues to exist as a micronation with no standing under international law.
What is the difference between a micronation and a small country such as Monaco?
Monaco is an established and self-governing sovereign nation with UN General Assembly membership, diplomatic relations with other nations, and well known legal venue in international law. Micronations do not have any of these characteristics. Size doesn’t determine statehood—recognition does.
