The Sôgmô has announced this evening in a public statement responding to provocative decisions by the Zealandian Council of State that Sandus will no longer be a signatory to the Denton Protocol. The decision comes after mounting pressure on the State of Sandus to renege its signature on the Denton Protocol, although that protocol has not been enforced since August 2014. A new foreign policy affecting the State of Sandus will be drafted by the Central People’s Government to replace it.
The statement expressed the displeasure of the State with regards to the Zealandian Council of State’s decision to “withdraw support for the Denton Protocol” and its notation that “the Sogmo (sic) of Sandus is a revisionist in the vein of Deng, Khrushchev and Gorbachev.” Sandus has announced that it will likely not sign a protocol which will be drafted by Mmes Lindström and Nymoria of Zealandia and that it urges its “micronational partners and friends and allies to consider rather gravely the perfidy of the Zealandian state.” (emphasis in the original) The decision by the Zealandian Council to betray the State of Sandus for a second time (first in August 2014, during the original diplomatic conflict) over diplomatic pressure led to the decision, since the coalition of states which were signatories was crumbling.
In the past fortnight since the GUM decision to reject the Sandum application, the Denton Protocol has become a flash point of foreign tension. Multiple micronationalists have berated the Sôgmô and Sandum perceived mala fides since news has broken that Sandus still adheres to the Denton Protocol. The Sôgmô has worked tirelessly over the past fortnight to defend Sandus’s sovereign decision to adhere to the Denton Protocol, to explain the historical situation, and to defend what Sandus believes was a diplomatic victory. As the Sôgmô said in his statement, “[the] protocol has achieved its ends, as — to our knowledge — today transgender micronationalists are largely respected by the intermicronational community at large.”
The decision comes as pressure on Sandus has been mounted by many GUM member-states for Sandus to change its sovereign foreign policy. When asked about the decision, Sörgel Publicola called the decision “a result of diplomatic attacks on Sandum sovereignty” borne out of diplomatic necessity. “The State of Sandus, though victorious, does not want to return to the anxious times of August 2014,” he said, referring to the darkest days of Sandum diplomacy. It was in those days that Zealandia, under Queen Charlotte, also left Sandus to defend and to stand up for the Denton Protocol while the Supreme Court, under the Queen’s pressure, made Zealandia’s signatory status all but ineffective and de jure. Sandus relied most on its allies in those days, Überstadt and Renasia, to keep Sandus from retaliation; eventually, however, mutual agreements were made between Sandus and Lostisland, Wyvernian, and Austenasian politicians to respect the purpose of the protocol while Sandus met their demands.
The protocol became a political point in Sandus’s recent GUM application membership where certain delegates of the Quorum were concerned by Sandus’s continued active adherence to the provisions of Article 3 of the Denton Protocol. However, the provisions had not been acted on since August 2014.
The diplomatic upheaval as a result of the news of Sandus’s continued adherence to the Denton Protocol also affected the Office of the Sôgmô in adverse ways. The upheaval has stressed the Sandum republic and its constitutional institutions, leading to the Sôgmô to temporarily consider abdication. A Latin update was published to the State of Sandus Facebook page, saying “[creditur] Sôgmônem abdicationem putare” or “it is believed that the Sôgmô is pondering abdication.” After having weighed the idea with his advisers, the Party Secretary and the Facilitator of the Council, það decided to walk-back talk of abdication, which would have profound constitutional effects on the Sandum republican régime. An update (“missum tempus”) was later published to the same status: “Sôgmô, ut Civitas Sandus continuaretur, non constitutionis κρίσιν petit,” or “The Sôgmô does not seek a constitutional crisis, so that the State of Sandus might continue.”
The statement can be read here. Its text can also be found below:
Dear Comrade Citizens and colleagues,
It is with much sadness today that we have learned that the Commonwealth of Zealandia will no longer be a signatory to the Denton Protocol. Although Zealandia signed the protocol in July 2014 and (under the guidance of Queen Charlotte Lindström) quickly suspended its enforcement, Sandus has enjoyed Zealandia’s diplomatic support of Sandus in overtly defending the Denton Protocol. Though Mmes Lindström and Nymoria will author a new protocol to replace the Denton Protocol, Sandus will await further explanation of the terms — though we fear that such a draft will renege the effective provisions of the Denton Protocol and will undermine Sandus’s successful campaign to have transgender micronationalists’ humanitarian rights respected and universal diplomatic conventions appropriately observed.
Furthermore, it is with some concern that Sandus has learned of a token motion in the Council of State which has proclaimed that this Office is “revisionist in the vein of Deng, Krushchev and Gorbachev,” referring to the former Chinese and Soviet premiers. Despite being completely symbolic, such diplomatic posturing show that the dismissal of Zealandia’s token de jure signatory status of the Denton Protocol is a slight against the State of Sandus: even though Zealandian citizens have benefitted most from Sandus’s painful pyrrhic victories in the Denton Protocol debacle of July/August 2014, their country showed little faith and abandoned the project so soon for diplomatic expediency. The claim that the Sôgmô is revisionist, while implicitly saying that the Zealandian régime is revolutionary, is comical and laughable: the Zealandians have showed, in the case of the July/August 2014 diplomatic conflict, that they would be unable to sustain diplomatic pressure as a result of upheaval in the intermicronational community. The Zealandians have merely reiterated this incompetence in pandering to micronational diplomats who have pressured them; their decision to rejoin the GUM, only a fortnight after they announced they would not be pursuing GUM membership, clearly portrays their capitulation to actual “reactionary” forces. We urge all our micronational partners and friends and allies to consider rather gravely the perfidy of the Zealandian state.
We announce publicly that the State of Sandus will rescind its signature on the Denton Protocol on 28 July 2016. The protocol has achieved its ends, as — to our knowledge — today transgender micronationalists are largely respected by the intermicronational community at large. We shall, however, promulgate our own foreign policy to reflect the change. The provisions of Article 3 of the Denton Protocol will be taken up by the Central People’s Government in an effort to defend and protect transgender Sandum citizens and our friends and allies in the future, should the need arise. We shall continue to adhere to conventions on the protection of privacy, respect for styles of address, and respect of diplomats and other micronationalists — as we always have done. We shall continue to work on the principle of diplomatic cooperation by means of a coalition of friends. Above all, the State of Sandus will remain sovereign in its foreign affairs, as per Libera.
In vi Liberae,
the Honourable Sôgmô Gaius Sörgel Publicola