ATM there seems to be no consistent line been drawn to whether an entity is or is not a country.

Why Gibraltar and not Wales?
Why Guam and not Alaska?
Why Taiwan and not Tibet?
Why Western Sahara and not Kashmir?
Why Antarctica and not Moon or Deep Sea?
Why all this offshore tax havens and no federal states of other countries?

I would like to have it either only full independent countries or everybodys favourite name for his streak of land where he lives/likes to live.

I prefer the first version, just in cases like China/Taiwan both should be possible, not every offshore tax haven;-)

---

Grüße vom Sänger

There are good reasons, though, for the examples you pick out.

To take the first, Wales is part of the United Kingdom. Gibraltar is not, nor is it politically part of Spain. There are people who would like things to be different in both cases, but the list reflects internationally agreed conventions. There are similar answers to each of the other examples.

The apparent anomalies in your list reflect special cases. For example, the political status of Western Sahara has been in limbo for many years, but there is no other reasonable way to describe it except as a country in its own right. The state of India, on the other hand, does not recognise that Kashmir is not part of India and it has de facto control.

Antarctica is listed separately because by international treaty no state can claim any of the territory, and there can be participants based there. For the deep sea, the vessel in which they are travelling is part of the territory of the country of registration.

As for 'off-shore tax havens', you miss the point that they are not part of other states. None of your list are tax havens, in the usual sense, but those that are jealously guard their independence.

I don't see any solution other than to insist on purely geographical descriptions (which do not work well for much of Europe anyway) or to have a much longer list which would be very confusing.

---

> There are good reasons, though, for the examples you pick out.
>
> To take the first, Wales is part of the United Kingdom. Gibraltar is not, nor
> is it politically part of Spain.

Gibraltar is not? It's not british? They have nothing to do with the UK? They do not have the Queen as their head of state?

I think, most of this 'countries' are the leftover of some former colonist superpower, and simply cannot decide whether to have independance or not.
If so, get away completely: own passport, no further subsidies, own currency, be a real country. If not, your part of your colonist country.

I agree, there are some difficulties (Tibet, Kashmir, Western Sahara, Taiwan, PA, Chechnya....)

Why not just state: Every UN-Member on the list, plus International and/or Other.

---

Grüße vom Sänger

> Why not just state: Every UN-Member on the list, plus International and/or Other.
>

Full UN membership is not a requirement of statehood, though, and the minor states, dependencies, etc, would be very unhappy at being lumped together as 'other' :) Some are bigger than other states with full membership.

I would leave well alone.

---

> Full UN membership is not a requirement of statehood, though, and the minor
> states, dependencies, etc, would be very unhappy at being lumped together as
> 'other' :) Some are bigger than other states with full membership.

So, what is then the difference between for exaple Gibraltar and Helgoland? What nationality does one 'Gibraltese' have in her/his passport? And who is issuing the passport?
Just because this colonies have some mega-ego, the list is this long? Or, the other way around: Just because Bayern(Bavaria) isn't that bullyish they are not listed? (I'm not bavarian, but they tend to be very special and distinct from the rest of germany ;-)

You see, I can list lot's of this not-lands, that are imho of the same kind as Gibraltar, but are for some for me unknown reason not on the list.

---

Grüße vom Sänger

> So, what is then the difference between for exaple Gibraltar and Helgoland?
> What nationality does one 'Gibraltese' have in her/his passport? And who is
> issuing the passport?

The difference is that Helgoland is part of the Federal Republic of Germany whilst Gibraltar is not part of the United Kingdom. It is an oddity, I agree, and there is some explanation of its constitutional position <a>here</a>. In reality, the Government of Gibraltar takes very little account of what the UK government says or does, and the people of Gibraltar refuse to allow any change in their status. They do not have the same passport as people in the UK.

&gt; Just because this colonies have some mega-ego, the list is this long? Or, the
&gt; other way around: Just because Bayern(Bavaria) isn't that bullyish they are
&gt; not listed? (I'm not bavarian, but they tend to be very special and distinct
&gt; from the rest of germany ;-)

It sometimes happens that the smaller the country, the more it insists on its status being recognised :). There are other examples. But you could also say that it depends on the attitude of other states. In the UK, we expect former colonies to have self government and not be part of the UK, even if they are too small to be fully independent or they refuse to join with a neighbouring country. Other countries take a different view, and national unity is very important to them.

History does strange things. It is not just about recent colonialism, because the present patchwork of states in Europe, and the recent wars in the Balkans, show just how important these things are to the people who live in these places. That is why it is best to leave the list in the form that the inhabitants of these countries accept, and not to try and impose a different answer because it looks tidier.

---