The Principality of Sealand

Wikileaks, the famed Whistle-blowing website known for it's widespread antagonization of Governmental secrecy, might be finding a new (and legal) home in the tiny Principality of Sealand.

You may be wondering, "Sealand? Like the one in San Antonio?".
That would be incorrect. That's "SeaWorld", and it's way friggin bigger than the Principality.

Sealand is not recognized by any other nation, and has a most colorful history: often regarded as the world's smallest nation, it consists entirely of a single anti-aircraft platform constructed by the British during WW2. Located approximately 6 miles off the east coast of the UK, it was abandoned after war and later seized in the 1960's by a certain hackneyed Englishman, Major Paddy Roy Bates, who declared it a new nation. Because the official British territorial claim only extends to 3 miles off of their own coastline, Sealand was outside of their jurisdiction, and therefore allowed to continue it's own measly existence.

However, fame and fortune are about to arrive in the Principality if rumors of a new deal go through. It has been whispered that Wikileaks, investigators extraordinaire, may be moving their servers to the tiny artificial island nation. Wikileaks is universally hounded by the governments of any nation it attempts to take refuge in, and has problems managing to set-up shop in any one place for very long. Therefore, in theory, Wikileaks could lay it's roots in Sealand where no other nation can claim jurisdiction and give them the ol' heave ho; there, Mr. Julian Assange, the founder and director or Wikileaks, can be free to roam the world's information networks like a young and naked innocent boy roaming the countryside!

It's an interesting idea. Would the Great Powers that Be respect Sealand's unrecognized yet truly legal sovereignty? I can see it going both ways.

On the one hand, Sealand holds a genuinely legal claim to sovereignty. Although unrecognized by any other nation, the Principality complies with all international rules of statehood, which is why the UK hasn't really done anything to squash it. If Wikileaks were to move it's ENTIRE operation (servers, personnel, the whole shebang) to Sealand, they would technically be under Sealand's inviolable (except by act of war) sovereignty. If say the US Government were to attempt to enter Sealand and abduct Assange, I think it could cause a huge public backlash in America. I foresee an OWS-esque movement cropping up out of such an affair, to be honest.

Conversely, the idea that Sealand could withstand the full wrath of any Great Power's government seems ludicrous. If Assange were to threaten to release another batch of secrets similar to the U.S. diplomatic cable release of 2010, you mean to tell me that they would just let him chill in the North Sea, sipping Cosmos and feeding Sea Gulls? Maybe they wouldn't bust in guns blazing, but if the stakes are high enough then the claim of sovereignty by some crazy old gentleman isn't likely to deter them from snaggling up some Wikileaks personnel and servers all at once.

Just an interesting development to ponder, I suppose.