McCarthy Begins GUM Chair Campaign

Mcarthian President Kit McCarthy has begun his campaign for the chairmanship of the Grand Unified Micronational.

A website and film were released, detailing McCarthy’s aims for the GUM.

McCarthy is competing with experienced Leylandiistan and Gurvata politician Shane Cahill, who is away from micronationalism until the 25th of June.

The GUM was re-established recently, following a long period as a Skype chatroom, the GUM Lounge. It is widely regarded as one of the most successful intermicronational organisations.


International Conflict Organisation Established


The McCarthy-McFarlane Accords of 2016 have been unveiled, which, amongst other things, announce the formation of the International Military and Warfare Council, an organisation for the management of micronational conflicts.

The Accords establish principles of micronational warfare, and found a new body, the IMWC, to enforce them.

A successor to both the McFarlane Rules of War and Kit McCarthy’s Report into Micronational Warfare and Military activities, the organisation attempts to deal with issues such as the infamous Pannonian War.

The Accords set out strict guidance on when and how a micronational war should be carried out. One of the main principles? Don’t call it a war. Kit McCarthy, Acting Chair, said this:

One of the major problems with the Pannonian War was that many felt calling a war was belittling macronational conflicts. Our solution to this is to create something called a formalised micronational conflict (FMC), which emulates macronational warfare, but by its very nature is not a war.

Other principles (there are 18 core points, alongside points regarding declarations of war, ethics, and surrender) set out in the Accords include:

  1. Safety and legality
  2. Legal oversight by independent watchdogs
  3. Proportional military activity
  4. Active operations
  5. Prevention of damage to uninvolved parties

The principles are based on Kit McCarthy’s Theory of Micronational Warfare.

The Accords provide for both ratification and membership. A party which wishes to remain out of the IMWC can ratify the treaty, which says they agree to go by its provisions, but those who have ratified it then have the option to apply for IMWC membership.

The founding members are:

  1. Republic of Mcarthia (Kit McCarthy)
  2. State of Nedland (Ned Greiner)
  3. Empire of Paravia (Patrick Renwick)
  4. Hugh McFarlane

Any party (country, organisation, etc.) can ratify the treaty, but membership is by application to the Chair (Kit McCarthy at present), and approval by the IMWC Assembly.

The founders were assisted by lawyer Stephen Hill.

You can view the Accords here.

Whispers from the GUM

There have been rumours that the now defunct Grand Unified Micronational might be coming back to life. What’s in these rumours?

themicronational understands that several community members have been approached about the possibility of the Grand Unified Micronational being relaunched. One source, who wished to remain anonymous said:

I was approached regarding the possibility of the GUM being restarted. It seemed like a great idea – I said, ‘let’s do it!’

Two other sources confirmed they had also been approached.

The Grand Unified Micronational (GUM) was arguably the most successful of all intermicronational organisations. Attracting many influential nations and leaders, it at one point even saw a face to face meeting, an idea which for almost all other organisations remains an elusive dream.

However, the GUM eventually reached its end, being formally dissolved following a period of inactivity on the 14th of June 2015*.

Ever since the GUM ended, people have been talking about replacing it, and some feel now the time is ripe for a new attempt.

It now seems as though this may happen. We asked three people to give their views.

Could and should the GUM be restarted?

The GUM can certainly be revived back into an intergovernmental organisation. Whether or not it should, however, is another matter. There is no need for it amongst the older micronations in the community; however, amongst the younger nations, there is no one formal multilateral venue in which they can form the strong bilateral relations the older members now have. For the younger micronations in the community, the GUM turning back into an organisation may well be beneficial for their diplomatic and professional advancement.
HIM Jonathan I

No. There’s a reason it fell away in the first place. The community has moved on from unions and become more focussed on bilateralism. If this focus ends too, then yes, we can go back to grand organisations and other similar ideas, but as things stand there is simply no demand for a GUM. A revival would just be a YAMO with a recognisable name.
HSH Prince James

Yes, and yes. The GUM is literally waiting to be restarted, as a friend of mine put it. Everything is in place. We really do have a need for a formal venue, to bring the young and old together. There are many younger nations that would benefit enormously from the experience. We need competent, skilful nationbuilders, and where better to promote this than the GUM?
President Kit McCarthy

Could and should the GUM be restarted? Leave your thoughts in the comments below.

*Note that the GUM was never technically dissolved – it was instead modified into a Skype chatroom.