Microstate

Last updated April 28, 2024

The world's five smallest sovereign states by area, from largest to smallest: San Marino, Tuvalu, Nauru, Monaco, and Vatican City shown in the same scale for size comparison Microstates.PNG — The world's five smallest sovereign states by area, from largest to smallest: San Marino, Tuvalu, Nauru, Monaco, and Vatican City shown in the same scale for size comparison

A microstate or ministate is a sovereign state having a very small population or land area, usually both. However, the meanings of "state" and "very small" are not well-defined in international law.^[1] Some recent attempts to define microstates have focused on identifying qualitative features that are linked to their size and population, such as partial delegation of their sovereignty to larger states, such as for international defense.

Commonly accepted examples of microstates include Andorra, Liechtenstein, Monaco, Nauru, Palau, San Marino, and Tuvalu. The smallest political entity recognized as a sovereign state is Vatican City, with fewer than 1,000 residents and an area of only 49 hectares (120 acres). Some microstates – such as Monaco and Vatican City – are city-states consisting of a single municipality.

Definitions

Quantitative

Most scholars identify microstates by using a quantitative threshold and applying it to either one variable (such as the size of its territory^[2] or population^[3]) or a composite of different variables.^[4] While it is agreed that microstates are the smallest of all states, there is no consensus on what variable (or variables) or cut-off point should be used to determine which political units should be labelled as "microstates" (as opposed to small "normal" states).^[1]^[5]^[6]^[7] According to some scholars the quantitative approach to defining microstates suffers from such problems as "inconsistency, arbitrariness, vagueness and inability to meaningfully isolate qualitatively distinct political units".^[5]

Qualitative

Some academics have suggested defining microstates according to the unique features that are linked to their geographic or demographic smallness.^[5]^[8]^[9] Newer approaches have proposed looking at the behaviour or capacity to operate in the international arena in order to determine which states should deserve the microstate label.^[9]^[10] Yet, it has been argued^{[ by whom? ]} that such approaches could lead to either confusing microstates with weak states^[6]^[8] (or failed states) or relying too much on subjective perceptions.^[5]

An alternative approach is to define microstates as "modern protected states".^[5] According to the definition proposed by Dumienski (2014): "microstates are modern protected states, i.e. sovereign states that have been able to unilaterally depute certain attributes of sovereignty to larger powers in exchange for benign protection of their political and economic viability against their geographic or demographic constraints."^[5] Adopting this approach permits limiting the number of microstates and separating them from both small states and autonomies or dependencies.^[5] Examples of microstates understood as modern protected states include such states as Liechtenstein, San Marino, Monaco, Niue, Andorra, the Cook Islands or Palau.

The smallest political unit recognized as a sovereign state is the Vatican City, though its precise status is sometimes disputed, e.g., Maurice Mendelson argued in 1972 that "[i]n two respects it may be doubted whether the territorial entity, the Vatican City, meets the traditional criteria of statehood".^[11]

Politics

Statistical research has shown that microstates are more likely to be democracies than larger states. In 2012, Freedom House classified 86% of the countries with fewer than 500,000 inhabitants as "free".^[12] This shows that countries with small populations often had a high degree of political freedom and civil liberties, which is one of the hallmarks of democracies. Some scholars have taken the statistical correlation between small size and democracy as a sign that smallness is beneficial to the development of a democratic political system,^[13] mentioning social cohesiveness, opportunities for direct communication and homogeneity of interests as possible explanations for why this is the case.^[12]^[14]

Case study research, however, has led some researchers to believe that the statistical evidence belies the anti-democratic elements of microstate politics.^[12]^[15] Due to small populations, family and personal relations are often decisive in microstate politics. In some cases, this impedes neutral and formal decision-making and instead leads to undemocratic political activity, such as clientelism, corruption, particularism and executive dominance.^[12]

The high number of democracies amongst microstates could be explained by their colonial history.^[12]^[13] Most microstates adopted the same political system as their colonial ruler.^[16] Because of the high number of microstates that were British colonies in the past, microstates often have a majoritarian and parliamentary political system similar to the Westminster system.^[13] Some microstates with a history as British colony have implemented some aspects of a consensus political system, to adapt to their geographic features or societal make-up.^[16] While the colonial history often determines what political systems microstates have, they do implement changes to better accommodate their specific characteristics.

Microstates and international relations

Microstates often rely on other countries in order to survive, as they have a small military capacity and a lack of resources. This had led some researchers to believe that microstates are forced to subordinate themselves to larger states which reduces their sovereignty.^[17] Research, however, has shown that microstates strategically engage in patron-client relationships with other countries.^[18] This allows them to trade some privileges to countries that can advance their interests the most. Examples of this are microstates that establish a tax haven or sell their support in international committees in exchange for military and economic support.^[17]

Historical anomalies and aspirant states

A small number of tiny sovereign political units have been founded on historic anomalies or eccentric interpretations of law. Those types of states, often labelled as "microstates," are usually located on small (usually disputed) territorial enclaves, generate limited economic activity founded on tourism and philatelic and numismatic sales, and are tolerated or ignored by the nations from which they claim to have seceded.

The Republic of Indian Stream, now the town of Pittsburg, New Hampshire, was a geographic anomaly that had been left unresolved by the Treaty of Paris, which ended the American Revolutionary War, and was claimed by both the United States and Canada. Between 1832 and 1835, the area's residents refused to acknowledge either claimant.^[19]

The Cospaia Republic became independent by a treaty error and survived from 1440 to 1826.^[20] Its independence made it important in the introduction of tobacco cultivation to Italy.

Couto Misto was disputed by Spain and Portugal and operated as a sovereign state until the 1864 Treaty of Lisbon partitioned the territory, with the larger part becoming part of Spain.^[21]

Jaxa was a small state that existed during the 17th century at the border between Tsardom of Russia and Qing China. Despite its location in East Asia, the state's primary language was Polish.^[22]

Related Research Articles

A country is a distinct part of the world, such as a state, nation, or other political entity. When referring to a specific polity, the term "country" may refer to a sovereign state, states with limited recognition, constituent country, or a dependent territory. Most sovereign states, but not all countries, are members of the United Nations. There is no universal agreement on the number of "countries" in the world since several states have disputed sovereignty status, limited recognition and a number of non-sovereign entities are commonly called countries.

A monarchy is a form of government in which a person, the monarch, is head of state for life or until abdication. The political legitimacy and authority of the monarch may vary from restricted and largely symbolic, to fully autocratic, and can span across executive, legislative, and judicial domains.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Micronation</span> Self-proclaimed political entity

A micronation is a political entity whose representatives claim that they belong to an independent nation or sovereign state, but which lacks legal recognition by any sovereign state. Micronations are classified separately from de facto states and quasi-states; they are also not considered to be autonomous or self-governing as they lack the legal basis in international law for their existence. The activities of micronations are almost always trivial enough to be ignored rather than disputed by the established nations whose territory they claim—referred to in micronationalism as macronations. Several micronations have issued coins, flags, postage stamps, passports, medals and other state-related items, some as a source of revenue. Motivations for the creation of micronations include theoretical experimentation, political protest, artistic expression, personal entertainment and the conduct of criminal activity. The study of micronationalism is known as micropatriology or micropatrology.

Sovereignty can generally be defined as supreme authority. Sovereignty entails hierarchy within the state, as well as external autonomy for states. In any state, sovereignty is assigned to the person, body or institution that has the ultimate authority over other people in order to establish a law or change existing laws. In political theory, sovereignty is a substantive term designating supreme legitimate authority over some polity. In international law, sovereignty is the exercise of power by a state. De jure sovereignty refers to the legal right to do so; de facto sovereignty refers to the factual ability to do so. This can become an issue of special concern upon the failure of the usual expectation that de jure and de facto sovereignty exist at the place and time of concern, and reside within the same organization.

International relations (IR) are the interactions among sovereign states. The scientific study of those interactions is also referred to as international studies, international politics, or international affairs. In a broader sense, the study of IR, in addition to multilateral relations, concerns all activities among states—such as war, diplomacy, trade, and foreign policy—as well as relations with and among other international actors, such as intergovernmental organizations (IGOs), international nongovernmental organizations (INGOs), international legal bodies, and multinational corporations (MNCs). There are several schools of thought within IR, of which the most prominent are realism, liberalism and constructivism.

A city-state is an independent sovereign city which serves as the center of political, economic, and cultural life over its contiguous territory. They have existed in many parts of the world since the dawn of history, including cities such as Rome, Carthage, Athens and Sparta and the Italian city-states during the Middle Ages and Renaissance, such as Florence, Venice, Genoa and Milan.

A dependent territory, dependent area, or dependency is a territory that does not possess full political independence or sovereignty as a sovereign state and remains politically outside the controlling state's integral area. As such, a dependent territory includes a range of non-integrated not fully to non-independent territory types, from associated states to non-self-governing territories.

An associated state is the minor partner or dependent territory in a formal, free relationship between a political territory and a major party—usually a larger nation.

A supranational union is a type of international organization that is empowered to directly exercise some of the powers and functions otherwise reserved to states. A supranational organization involves a greater transfer of or limitation of state sovereignty than other kinds of international organizations.

A European microstate or European ministate is a very small sovereign state in Europe. In modern usage, it typically refers to the six smallest states in Europe by area: Andorra, Liechtenstein, Malta, Monaco, San Marino, and Vatican City. All except Malta and San Marino are monarchies. These states trace their status back to the first millennium or the early second millennium except for Liechtenstein, created in the 17th century.

The Westphalian system, also known as Westphalian sovereignty, is a principle in international law that each state has exclusive sovereignty over its territory. The principle developed in Europe after the Peace of Westphalia in 1648, based on the state theory of Jean Bodin and the natural law teachings of Hugo Grotius. It underlies the modern international system of sovereign states and is enshrined in the United Nations Charter, which states that "nothing ... shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state."

Holy See–European Union relations are the relations between the European Union (EU) and the Holy See.

A sovereign state is a state that has the highest authority over a territory.

The international system is for the most part made up by small powers or small states. While a small power in the international system may never equal or surpass the effect of larger powers, they can nevertheless influence the workings of the international system together with others. The formalization of the division between small and great powers came about with the signing of the Treaty of Chaumont in 1814. Before that the assumption had been that all independent states were in theory equal regardless of actual strength and responsibilities.

The islands of Africa are a major geographical sub-region of Africa, and represent a distinct demographic and historical cultural sphere of influence on the continent.

The political status of the Cook Islands and Niue is formally defined as being states in free association within the Realm of New Zealand, which is made up of the Cook Islands, Niue, and New Zealand and its territories, Tokelau and the Ross Dependency. The Cook Islands and Niue do not have full constitutional independence from New Zealand but act as independent countries. Some countries have recognised them as sovereign entities and established diplomatic relations. However, New Zealand may carry out defence and foreign affairs on behalf of the two associated states when requested.

References

1 2 Warrington, Edward (June 1994). "Lilliput Revisited". Asian Journal of Public Administration. 16 (1). doi:10.1080/02598272.1994.10800284.
↑ Mehmet, Ozay; Tahiroglu, M. (1 January 2002). "Growth and equity in microstates: Does size matter in development?". International Journal of Social Economics. 29 (1/2): 152–162. doi:10.1108/03068290210413047.
↑ Boyce, Peter J.; Herr, Richard A. (April 1974). "Microstate diplomacy in the south pacific". Australian Outlook. 28 (1): 24–35. doi:10.1080/10357717408444489.
↑ Reid, George L. (1974). The impact of very small size on the international behavior of microstates. Beverly Hills, Calif: Sage Publications. ISBN 9780803904064.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Dumienski, Zbigniew (2014). Microstates as Modern Protected States: Towards a New Definition of Micro-Statehood (PDF) (Report). Occasional Paper. Centre for Small State Studies. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2014-07-14. Retrieved 2014-06-07.
1 2 Neemia, U. (1995). Smallness, islandness and foreign policy behaviour: aspects of island microstates foreign policy behaviour with special reference to Cook Islands and Kiribati (Thesis). University of Wollongong. Archived from the original on 19 February 2024.
↑ Dommen, E. (1985). Hein, P. (ed.). States, Microstates and Islands. London ; Dover, N.H: Routledge Kegan & Paul. ISBN 978-0-7099-0862-3.
1 2 Amstrup, N., 1976. The Perennial Problem of Small States: A Survey of Research Efforts. Cooperation and Conflict, 11(2), pp. 163–182.
1 2 Neumann, I.B. & Gstöhl, S., 2004. Lilliputians in Gulliver’s World ? Small States in International Relations.
↑ Oest, K.J.N. & Wivel, A., 2010. Security, profit or shadow of the past? Explaining the security strategies of microstates. Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 23(3), pp. 429–453.
↑ Mendelson, M. H. (1972). "Diminutive States in the United Nations". The International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 21(4), pp.609–630.^{[ better source needed ]}
1 2 3 4 5 Veenendaal, W. (2015). "Democracy in microstates: why smallness does not produce a democratic political system", Democratization, 22(1): 92-112.
1 2 3 Anckar, D. (2004). "Regime Choices in Microstates: The Cultural Constraint", Commonwealth & Comparative Politics, 42(2): 206-223.
↑ Corbett, J. (2015). ""Everybody knows everybody": practising politics in the Pacific Islands", Democratization, 22(1): 51-72.
↑ Erk, J. and Veenendaal, W. (2014). "Is Small Really Beautiful? The Microstate Mistake", Journal of Democracy, 25(3): 135-148.
1 2 Anckar, D. (2008). "Microstate Democracy: Majority or Consensus; Diffusion or Problem-Solving?", Democratization, 15(1): 67-85.
1 2 Sharman, J.C. (2017). "Sovereignty at the Extremes: Micro-States in World Politics", Political Studies, 65(3): 559-575.
↑ Veenendaal, W. (2017). "Analyzing the Foreign Policy of Microstates: The Relevance of the International Patron-Client Model", Foreign Policy Analysis, 13(3): 561-577.
↑ Doan, Daniel (1997). Indian Stream Republic : settling a New England frontier, 1785-1842. Jere R. Daniell, Ruth Doan MacDougall. Hanover, NH: University Press of New England. ISBN 0-87451-767-2. OCLC 35651345.
↑ Jepson, Tim (2009). The rough guide to Tuscany & Umbria. Jonathan Buckley, Mark Ellingham, Rough Guides (7th ed.). New York: Rough Guides. ISBN 978-1-4053-8529-9. OCLC 743223039.
↑ "Treaties and international agreements registered from 22 September 1995 to 29 September 1995 Nos. 32135 to 32181". United Nations Treaty Series. 2001-02-14. doi:10.18356/a43b73bc-en-fr. ISBN 9789210454193. ISSN 2412-1495.
↑ Sulewski, Wojciech (1973). Konterfekty dziwnych Polaków. Iskry. OCLC 69483582.