Citizens of two worlds -Dual citizens fight doubts over loyalty

Americans are expected to ride the wave of post-Sept. 11 patriotism when they mark the Fourth of July. But even as the commemoration crests Thursday, a little-noticed statistic is sparking debate over national identity and the obligations of citizenship.

As many as 40 million Americans -- one in seven of the population -- could be dual citizens. They include those born in the United States as well as immigrants who have become naturalized.

"We do not know what the consequences of dual citizenship are. We have never been in this circumstance before," said Stanley Renshon, a scholar of political psychology who is writing a book, "The 50 Percent American: National Identity in the Global Age."

"Think about how hard it is to figure out a common purpose even when we are fully connected as a nation," Renshon said. "Now we have a situation where a vast number of citizens have shallow connections to the country and its identity."

Not so, said Jan Jaben-Eilon, the Israel experience coordinator for the Jewish Federation of Greater Atlanta, a U.S. citizen who took Israeli citizenship six years ago.

"I am not a person who feels 'My country right or wrong,' " Jaben-Eilon said. "You may not like your child's behavior all the time, but you're always going to love that child. America is the country who made me who I am, but that doesn't mean I don't have very deep feelings for Israel as well."

Even though they swear to "absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity" to any other nation, many naturalized citizens own property, vote, run for office and even serve in the military in a foreign land.

That doesn't make them any less American, said Francisco Duran, a programming coordinator at Turner Broadcasting who became a U.S. citizen in 1999.

"I feel proud to have both nationalities," he said. "Mexico is like my mother, the United States my father."

That bothers some immigration scholars such as Renshon, who worry about the blurring of borders and national identities. But others say dual citizenship is a natural consequence of an increasingly interconnected world and can only enhance understanding between nations.

For Duran, U.S. citizenship offered him the chance to realize "the American dream" he longed to pursue after he, as an 8-year-old in Guanajuato, Mexico, watched Neil Armstrong land on the moon. But he doesn't live a day without remembering his roots.

"Asking me to choose between the two countries is like asking a child whose parents are divorcing to pick which parent he wants to live with," Duran said. "You want both."

Decades ago, immigrants used to arrive on U.S. shores never expecting to see the homelands they left behind. Back then, dual citizens were suspect for their divided loyalties.

Today's newcomers stay in touch through the Internet, satellite TV and cheaper phone service. They return to their native cities and villages -- however remote -- through faster modes of transportation. Growing numbers of people are marrying someone from a different country.

The State Department doesn't track the number of dual citizens because as far as it is concerned, a person who takes the oath of citizenship is first and foremost an American. The government also has no concrete way of knowing whether a naturalized U.S. citizen has renounced or retained a previous citizenship.

But what is known is that 90 percent of immigrants to the United States come from one of 92 countries that allow some form of dual citizenship or nationality. And as economic ties between nations continue to strengthen, so is the inclination toward allowing dual citizenship.

"It has to do with the global world we are living in," said immigration attorney Mark Newman. "To make you renounce your citizenship is like making you swallow such a strong pill that people wouldn't do it."

Australia changed its laws in April to allow its citizens to remain so even if they wish to become a citizen of another country. Mexicans, the largest group of immigrants in the United States, are allowed to keep their Mexican citizen status after a 1998 revision of its laws.

The United States, too, has over the years softened its stance on dual citizenship. The State Department allows Americans to acquire citizenship of another nation except in extreme cases, such as serving in the military of a country at war with the United States.

Duran said he felt more comfortable taking the U.S. citizenship oath knowing that he would be able to retain the rights and privileges afforded to Mexicans. So did Alpharetta real estate agent Maria Cortes-Blease of Colombia, which started allowing dual citizenship in 1991. She has been here for 30 years but waited until Colombian law changed to apply for naturalization.

"I felt that by giving up my citizenship, I was betraying the place [where] I was born," she said. "It was very hard for me to say, 'I want to become an American,' if it meant giving up my Colombian citizenship."

Two other countries that send large groups of immigrants to America -- the Philippines and India -- are weighing the pros and cons of dual citizenship. The economic advantages of U.S. citizens owning property and investing in their former homelands are too large for nations not to try to hold on to their population.

Dual citizens say they became Americans, first and foremost, out of love and allegiance to the United States. But they acknowledge the advantages to having one foot here and the other in their previous home.

Permanent residents must pay a 50 percent estate tax. They cannot vote or run for office. They are not eligible for certain scholarships.

"Australians didn't want to lose their citizenship or Australian identity, but they were feeling disadvantaged in the American system," said Mary-Jane Jones, an immigration official in the Australian Embassy in Washington. "Now they no longer have that problem."

For others, citizenship opens the door for family reunifications. Du Dang of Vietnam said he is taking citizenship classes in Chamblee so that one day he can sponsor his wife, whom he hasn't seen in six years.

Still others want citizenship just to acquire a U.S. passport, which allows them ease of travel.

"It seemed a little silly for us to hold on," said Pam Sellman, a British businesswoman who acquired American citizenship in 2000. "Probably at the end of it all, we would have given up our British citizenship. But since Britain allows it, we never had to think about it."

A "practical citizenship," however, bothers those who take the oath of allegiance very seriously.

"It was quite emotional for me. Have you read the pledge recently?" said Rana Hajjeh, a medical epidemiologist at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and a citizen of both her native Lebanon and the United States. "It's not just about having another passport -- it's all about values. And the values that U.S. citizenship embodies are great and things I believe in completely."

But Renshon, the political psychologist, argues that the first few lines of the oath of citizenship demand an act that is virtually impossible of people born and raised in another country.

"If you spend 25 years in another country, it's ludicrous to expect that with a snap of a finger, everything you have experienced in those 25 years will go away," he said. "In effect, we are asking people to begin their citizenship with an untruth."

Georgia State University professor Kaveh Kamooneh agreed. A native of Iran, he became a U.S. citizen in 1978.
"I identify myself as Iranian," he said. "It was a hard thing to say the Pledge of Allegiance. You are made to say things that you might not necessarily believe in. I wonder about the genuineness of people who only see red, white and blue."

In the post-Sept. 11 climate, greater attention is being paid to concerns raised by dual citizenship. One debate could be over whether the United States needs to maintain greater control of its citizenship process.

Raoul Donato, the honorary consul general of the Philippines in Atlanta, said dual citizenship is possible only if a government clarifies what is expected of an individual.

"When you raise the flag and say the pledge, you don't belong to any other country," he said, "but there are certain countries where you don't have to take such a pledge."

Renshon said the government should be easing the integration process by sponsoring English classes or cultural classes that teach newcomers how to obtain insurance or credit or driver's licenses.

At the same time, he said, dual citizens ought not to be able to vote or run for office in another country. Or, without exception, serve in a foreign army. He would not allow American Jews, for instance, to fight for Israel.

"Taking the oath of citizenship is like taking an oath to support apple pie," Renshon said. "It's an oath without consequence. There is no administrative, legislative or legal follow-through to taking it."

I guess these people were lying when they took the Oath of Allegiance to become citizens. They are liars who swore false oaths. That is grounds for revoking citizenship. If they can't put our country first, renounce all other loyalties and adopt our culture, they should go home. Now. The hell with them. They are not Americans, they are parasites.

Er, which people? The tone of the article suggested that most dual-citizens put the US first and their other country second. I don't see anything wrong with dual citizenship, as it can make life much easier when travelling between two countries (which might be needed to visit family members abroad).

"I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by law;...I take this obligation freely without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God. In acknowledgement whereof I have hereunto affixed my signature."

I don't see anything in this Oath about convenience. I don't see anyone in that story putting America first. They are users, out to get what they can from America, and liars. Please read the first 37 words of this Oath to which they swear when becoming citizens. I don't see where it says anything at all about secondary loyalties. It says "renounce and abjure....without mental reservation."

If this is all your word is worth, you do not deserve to be an American citizen. And if I was your spouse, I would be a little worried about those wedding vows, and how honorable you are, because you are extremely unclear on the concept. Ease of travel, indeed.

Okay, so what of those who are dual-citizens by virtue of being born in the USA and then obtaining dual-citizenship elsewhere?

I've met exactly one dual-citizen. He was born in the US but had dual-citizenship in South Africa because his father's side of the family lived there. He was also very patriotic (toward the US) and staunchly conservative.

I think you answered your own question. He swore allegiance to another country and expects to remain a U.S. citizen in good standing? Why would we want him? His own convenience or blood ties or whatever comes first, before his loyalty to the country of his birth? This is the nationality equivalent of cheating on your taxes.

This sort of nonsense--the idea is inherently contradictory--is only possible because the Left has done so competent a job in confusing the public conception of what is involved in the concept of the Nation, etc.. The roots of this confusion are the same as those behind our present immigration policy. Conservatives who understand the many pitfalls that we face in trying to preserve our wonderous heritage, need to address this confusion--and address it now.

We have gone into some of these basics in Immigration & The American Future. Please take a few minutes to review the early paragraphs, where the nature of a nation is addressed. The ideal of dual citizenship flys in its very face.

William Flax Return Of The Gods Web Site

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.