Why Aren't There Many People Fighting for the Secession or Independence of Hawaii, Alaska, Guam, Faroe Islands, Gibraltar, Tahiti, or Aruba?

Introduction

The question of why certain regions, such as Hawaii, Alaska, Guam, Faroe Islands, Gibraltar, Tahiti, or Aruba, do not frequently see public advocacy for secession or independence is a multifaceted one. Examining the historical, political, and social contexts of these territories offers valuable insights into why many of their inhabitants are content with their current status or do not seek change.

Ahistorical Context: Treaty of Utrecht and Gibraltar

The case of Gibraltar is an interesting example where a specific historical treaty has shaped its geopolitical status. The Treaty of Utrecht of 1713, signed under British rule, includes an important clause regarding Gibraltar's status. Article X of the treaty stipulates:

“And in case it shall hereafter seem meet to the Crown of Great Britain to grant, sell or by any means to alienate therefrom the propriety of the said town of Gibraltar it is hereby agreed and concluded that the preference of having the sale shall always be given to the Crown of Spain before any others.”

This provision makes Gibraltarian independence a moot point as it explicitly preserves Spain’s right of preference for the territory. Consequently, any efforts to secure Gibraltarian independence would likely meet with firm opposition from Spain and be unwise given the historical and legal constraints.

Current Geopolitical Status and Habits of the Inhabitants

Many of the inhabitants of these territories do not necessarily desire secession or independence. The reasons for this range from contentment with their current status to a preference for the benefits and protections offered by their current administrative bodies. Here's a breakdown of a few cases:

Hawaii

Hawaii is a state of the United States, and its inhabitants generally have no significant desire to secede. The islands' integration with the U.S. has resulted in a stable and prosperous society, and the benefits of this arrangement, such as federal funding and protection, are often seen as beneficial.

Alaska

Residents of Alaska have minimal interest in secession, as the state benefits significantly from its association with the U.S. Alaska’s geographical and economic isolation historically has made the idea of a distinct identity more appealing, but secessionist sentiments are minimal. The state is economically diverse, and its citizens see the advantages of being part of the larger American market and federal protection.

Guam

Although Guam is an unincorporated territory of the United States, its inhabitants do not actively pursue secession. The benefits of U.S. citizenship, defense, and economic assistance are seen as advantageous. Additionally, the U.S. presence in Guam provides a sense of security and stability, which become priorities amid geopolitical tensions in the region.

Faroe Islands and Gibraltar

The Faroe Islands, like Gibraltar, are autonomous territories with their own parliaments, but they do not seek independence from Denmark. The inhabitants of both places are content with their status as part of their respective sovereign nations, enjoying a high degree of local autonomy and support from their mother countries.

Tahiti and Aruba

Tahiti, as part of French Polynesia, and Aruba, as part of the Kingdom of the Netherlands, have their own unique statuses. While there is no widespread public demand for secession in either territory, the inhabitants generally find their current arrangement satisfactory. These regions benefit from their associations with their respective countries, which offer international recognition, protection, and economic opportunities.

The Importance of Local Autonomy and International Stability

While it might be tempting to speculate about the innate desires of the inhabitants, it is important to recognize the role of local autonomy and international stability. Many people in these territories prefer the balance of their current status. They benefit from the stability and security provided by their governments while retaining a measure of local control through autonomous institutions.

In conclusion, the lack of public support for secession or independence among the inhabitants of Hawaii, Alaska, Guam, Faroe Islands, Gibraltar, Tahiti, or Aruba can be attributed to a combination of contentment with the status quo, the benefits of their current arrangements, and a pragmatic understanding of the geopolitical landscape. These territories are well-positioned to enjoy the most favorable aspects of both local and international life without the complications that might arise from secession.