Ideally the UN would develop a comprehensive policy ahead of time. Otherwise I could envision a scenario whereby non-inundated nations enact a variety of individual policies ranging from formal recognition of extraterritorial sovereignty to government-in-exile arrangements a la Tibet or WW2 France, to perhaps other arrangements.
The UN won't do anything like that, since the monopolists — and all its members are monopolists by nature — won't allow it.
At the very least one would hope the Sovereign Military Order of Malta will be issuing accreditation to any inundated nations. In that case they would have to let Tuvalu and the others each have a room in their HQ for a diplomatic office.
They are pretty cramped for space as it is. They only have a small building in Rome.
The US, Canada, and Australia, as well as all of the large, powerful, and diffuse
BRICS countries should volunteer to that, if they actually believe in human rights.
Quote from the article:
So the legal implications of sinking islands are preoccupying environmental lawyers. Can there be such a thing as a submarine state? According to one definition, a state needs a clear territory, a permanent population and the ability to deal with other states. From a league or so under the sea, that sounds hard.
I have news for you: micronational law is already far ahead of these folks. Article 1 of the Montevideo Convention, an accurate statement of customary international law, states
The state as a person of international law should possess the following qualifications: (a) a permanent population; (b) a defined territory; (c) government; and (d) capacity to enter into relations with the other states.
Only three out of the four qualifications above are actual
requirements for the existence of a state.
A credible state needs to show evidence of at least all of the following:
- Common law or jus commune evidence it exists.
- Lex mercatoria evidence it exists.
- Corporate law evidence it exists.
- Statutory law evidence it exists.
- International law evidence it exists.
- Activist evidence it exists.
- Scholarly evidence it exists.
Common law or
jus commune evidence for a state's existence can be shown by the payment of monthly or periodic utility bills. This kind of evidence is routinely used in normal states to prove one's residence. I have proven you don't need to live in a specific area, or even on land to pay utility bills, as Internets like the Cesidian Root have been legally shown to be utilities, can provide most of the communication services a state needs, and the master root servers of the Cesidian Root are not located anywhere close to where I live, nor does the place where the server is located really affect jurisdiction, according to Cesidian law, or even according to actual management practices of ccTLDs, which can be of one country, and completely managed in another.
Lex mercatoria evidence for a state's existence can be shown with evidence of at least limited, but measurable, economic transactions. A state does not exist if it cannot show at least a few economic transactions. These transactions are usually taxes in most states, but they do not need to be if the state provides certain special services to its citizens, and is paid for the provision of these services.
Corporate law evidence for a state's existence can be shown by the incorporation of a few domestic and foreign corporations. A state does not exist if it only has a state corporation, but no subsidiary corporations. That's like a human body without arms and legs. Moreover, if there is a market for foreign-based corporations, this shows that the state is also attractive to foreign business (and/or capital).
Statutory law evidence for a state's existence can be shown with the presence and use of photo ID cards and passaports. The former is statutory and secondary proof of residence, while the latter is evidence of citizenship.
International law evidence for a state's existence can be shown with stamped visas, either of the state in question to foreign passports, or of foreign states to the state's own passports. Another kind of International law evidence for a state's existence can be shown through evidence, even minimal, of diplomatic recognition by sovereign states and/or international organisations (IGOs). While diplomatic recognition by sovereign states may be more advantageous for most states, recognition by international organisations is actually superior International law evidence.
Activist evidence for a state's existence can be shown by the sponsorship of a variety of cultural, artistic, musical or sporting events, or through political petitions or drives meant to change public policy within one's state or abroad. A state does not exist if it only exists to collect taxes, and has no other human ideals or goals.
Scholarly evidence for a state's existence can be shown by the sponsorship of technical, scientific, historic, geographic, legal or linguistics research. A state does not exist if it doesn't add one iota to global culture or wisdom.
If you can scientifically and legally prove the existence of a state with all of the seven characteristics above, and without the exclusive control of one square foot/meter of land, then the states with lots of land have the moral and legal obligation to allow states without land to either exist, or to continue to exist.
I believe change in this direction will come first within specific states, just as all other great changes have occurred in the past.