Am I the only one opposed to dual citizenship?

[Ronald C. Semone]

In the old days if you were an immigrant who wanted to become an American citizen, one of the things you had to do was give up all allegiance to a foreign country. Nowadays, it is apparently possible to become a citizen of the U.S. and still retain citizenship in another country. I don't approve of this. Am I alone?

[Eva Luna]

What's your rationale? Just curious.

[Gleena]

What about the other way round? What if an American moves to somewhere else and becomes a citizen, should they have to give up their American citizenship?

[Otara]

FFS it just means you can do things like visit your family without it being a pain in the neck.

It doesnt mean you're going to race off and fight for the other country when the invasion comes.

Otara

[JRDelirious]

Well, the thing is, Ronald, as it stands the Oath of Naturalization (http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=facd6db8d7e37210VgnVCM100000082ca60aRCRD&vgnextchannel=dd7ffe9dd4aa3210VgnVCM100000b92ca60aRCRD) STILL reads "I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state or sovereignty"

It was noticed in the practice, however, that many other countries don't give a hoot about that and refuse to accept that the person had forsaken them.

Additionally, there is the very real element that there are such a thing as people who by birth are eligible for multiple citizenships under the laws of other nations, e.g. the parents are legal immigrants but still not naturalized themselves, so the kid gets US citizenship Jus Soli and citizenship of Karjakistan Jus Sanguinis 'cause Karjakistan says their citizenship is transmitted to legitimate children of Karjakis everywhere whether they want it or not.

So dual citizenship is a fact of legal life for some individuals whether the US likes it or not, even whether THEY like it or not. This could and had consequences to the point of US citizens, sometimes even who emigrated as minors, being hauled in for draft dodging when visiting the old country.

So IIRC the current policy, and I'll ask Eva Luna to corect me if I get it wrong, is that for naturalization you do swear sole loyalty to the USA and rejection of other allegiances, but whether you're naturalized or natural-born American, once you're one of us the USA does not really care if you're nominally considered a citizen of another country by mere accident of birth, what counts for us is that you are an American and follow our laws. Conversely, except for some very specific instances, the preferred way to renounce US citizenship is for you to explicitly do so before an American consular official.

[Ronald C. Semone]

What's your rationale? Just curious.

An obvious one is the potential conflict when the two nations you owe allegiance to come are at odds with oneanothr.

[Ronald C. Semone]

What about the other way round? What if an American moves to somewhere else and becomes a citizen, should they have to give up their American citizenship?

Absolutely! I don't know how you can swear allegiance to another country and still call youself an American.

[Guinastasia]

IIRC, isn't it extremely difficult to renounce one's U.S. citizenship? At least formally.

[Gleena]

Absolutely! I don't know how you can swear allegiance to another country and still call youself an American.

Interestingly, I have no problem with it.

I live in Australia, I vote here and pay taxes, and I'm a citizen. I'm an American by birth, where, incidentally, I'm still required to pay taxes, even though I don't live there. I have a deep and abiding interest in how America does, as a result, and thus I retain my citizenship and I vote there.

It's not hard, I'm a bit of both. Sorry it bothers you.

[Eva Luna]

An obvious one is the potential conflict when the two nations you owe allegiance to come are at odds with oneanothr.

I doubt it's ever an issue for the vast majority of people with dual citizenship even as a theoretical matter, and as a practical matter, how would it ever matter unless you were called for military service by more than one country at the same time?

[Eva Luna]

So IIRC the current policy, and I'll ask Eva Luna to corect me if I get it wrong, is that for naturalization you do swear sole loyalty to the USA and rejection of other allegiances, but whether you're naturalized or natural-born American, once you're one of us the USA does not really care if you're nominally considered a citizen of another country by mere accident of birth, what counts for us is that you are an American and follow our laws. Conversely, except for some very specific instances, the preferred way to renounce US citizenship is for you to explicitly do so before an American consular official.

All very much correct, last I checked.

[galen ubal]

Absolutely! I don't know how you can swear allegiance to another country and still call youself an American.

My analogy:

Do you love your mom? How about your dad? Siblings? Spouse? Are they never in conflict? Wouldn't supporting two, or more, despite their differences be a conflict of interest?

FTR, I moved to Australia six and a half years ago, after marrying an Australian woman. I acquired permanent residency, then Australian citizenship. It never crossed my mind to renounce my US citizenship - leaving aside the practical considerations, I AM AN AMERICAN. Born and bred.
I also am an Australian - I've adopted this country, its people, and they've adopted me. I'll be here, probably, for the rest of my life.

These two countries, to continue my analogy, are my parents; they shelter me, and punish me if/when necessary. Why should I choose between them?

Now, granted, the possibility of any serious conflict between my two countries is...slim, to put it mildly. Possibly over beer... :D

Anyway, I'll continue to honor my duties to the US (filing taxes, voting, etc) and to Australia. And I feel comfortable with that state of affairs.

(There are some things I can't do without renouncing one or the other, but none of them are an issue)

[tetranz]

I suspect some countries don't even have way of renouncing citizenship. For those that do, it's probably so rarely used that it's a hassle to do. If you wondered into an embassy or something they probably wouldn't have the right form to fill in or whatever.

[Duckster]

Nowadays, it is apparently possible to become a citizen of the U.S. and still retain citizenship in another country. I don't approve of this. Am I alone?

You are alone. Several SCOTUS decisions and laws are not in your favor (http://www.richw.org/dualcit/).

[tetranz]

This has been discussed many times around here but...

As far I know, the court decisions were all about what happens to a US citizen if they become a citizen of another country. I think the courts generally decided that it does not endanger their US citizenship.

The original question was about someone from another country becoming a US citizen. I don't think there has been any court decisions about that. It's just a matter of practicality. I don't think it's anything new.

I'm just guessing but in the past it may have been more common for people to lose their original citizenship if they gained US citizenship because their original country did not allow dual citizenship. That's nothing to do with the US. A country has a right to say "if you become someone else then you're no longer one of us". I think there are less countries doing that these days. Australia was like that until about ten years ago. I believe Rupert Murdoch lost his Australian citizenship (as per Australian laws) when he became a US citizen to satisfy FCC requirements for owning a TV station. He could probably get it back now if he wanted it.

[even sven]

Multinational identity has always been a possibility for the rich- look at how complex the national identities of Europe's royalty can be. Now the middle-class and even the poor can maintain families, friendships and business contacts around the world.

I have a friend who was born with three separate citizenships (parents from two different countries had her and raised her mostly in the US, but she's split a lot of time between the three countries and has close family in all of them.) She tells me that she can keep those citizenships, but if it ever matters (like she needs consular services, is in a hostage crisis, or a war situation) she has to identify herself as primarily American or risk losing her citizenship. Seems fair to me.

[Driver8]

In the old days if you were an immigrant who wanted to become an American citizen, one of the things you had to do was give up all allegiance to a foreign country. Nowadays, it is apparently possible to become a citizen of the U.S. and still retain citizenship in another country. I don't approve of this. Am I alone?I suspect you are not completely alone, even the lamest of ideas enjoy at least some support, but count me out. It isn't clear what you intend to change here: foreign citizenship is a matter between the foreign government and the citizen. There isn't a United States form I could fill in to renounce my South African citizenship. I bet some countries don't even have a well defined mechanism to relinquish citizenship. So what United States policy are you going to implement that enforces this?

This wouldn't have been different in the past. As tetranz states, perhaps in the past other countries more often would require you to relinquish their citizenship before taking on United States citizenship, but that is a matter between the other country and the citizen.

For my part, I am in the process of applying for United States citizenship. Once I have it I will be a citizen of both the United States and South Africa. It would never cross my mind to not "approve" of this. The practical concerns over this are almost nonexistent.

[Hallucinex]

For my part, I am in the process of applying for United States citizenship. Once I have it I will be a citizen of both the United States and South Africa. It would never cross my mind to not "approve" of this. The practical concerns over this are almost nonexistent.

I thought South Africa was one of the ones where you do have to renounce their citizenship if you take another? (unless maybe they've changed it since) Pretty sure that's what happened with my mother-in-law on taking Australian citizenship (and that my wife only got to keep her SA citizenship because she was underage at the time, so technically wasn't able to consent to giving up the citizenship)

[SecondJudith]

I knew before I opened this thread it would be by a US American fretting about immigrants to the US. I just don't understand what the anxiety about dual citizenship, or someone being in any kind of liminal state of national identity, is.

[Gleena]

I knew before I opened this thread it would be by a US American fretting about immigrants to the US. I just don't understand what the anxiety about dual citizenship, or someone being in any kind of liminal state of national identity, is.


Cause...er...'Merika, Fuck Yeah? That's all I got.

[Rushgeekgirl]

I said "something else" because I don't care. I mean, of all the things to worry about in the world, this just hasn't been on my top ten thousand list.

[bucketybuck]

An obvious one is the potential conflict when the two nations you owe allegiance to come are at odds with oneanothr.

I have both Irish and British citizenship, but its ok, I dont think those countries will ever fall out over anything.

[yojimbo]

:D

[Moonlitherial]

Some countries do care. When I was a young Moon I had a friend who was born in Japan as her parents were working there but was also a Canadian. Apparently when she turned 21 she was going to have to make a choice as Japan doesn't support dual citizenship for adults.

[GorillaMan]

I doubt it's ever an issue for the vast majority of people with dual citizenship even as a theoretical matter, and as a practical matter, how would it ever matter unless you were called for military service by more than one country at the same time?
In recognition of how common dual citizenship is here, the European Union has specific rules about military service, which basically make sure that nobody can be required to serve it in more than one country (not that it still exists in all that many).

Interestingly, renouncing British citizenship is a simple matter of downloading and filling out a form: http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/britishcitizenship/givingupcitizenship The requirements do include proof that you have or will obtain other citizenship, i.e. that you're not making yourself stateless.

[Barkis is Willin']

Nowadays, it is apparently possible to become a citizen of the U.S. and still retain citizenship in another country. I don't approve of this. Am I alone?

Depending on what country you're from, this can be very easy or very, very difficult.

I have no problem with dual citizenship. What if your parents are citizens of different countries? Should you not have citizenship in each? This is the case with my son, and he will be able to freely travel or work throughout the EU while also being a citizen of the US. I think it's awesome.

[Anaamika]

I admit it bothers me a little, but it's purely on a personal sense - I had to give up my old citizenship when I got here, and I don't see why anyone else is allowed to keep theirs! But honestly it's not as though I am all up in arms about it. I hardly think about it and it's not anywhere near the top of my list on worries.

[Palo Verde]

I was born in the UK to American citizens. From birth I've been a citizen of both countries. I've never had to apply or fill out any special forms to be a citizen of both countries.

I wouldn't even know how to stop being a UK citizen if I wanted to.

[RTFirefly]

I checked 'something else' because while I don't know if it's a good idea or a bad idea, it's probably pretty trivially so, either way.

Incidentally, my son has dual Russian and American citizenship. Russian, because he was born in Russia to Russian parents, and American, because my wife and I adopted him and brought him to America; under the law, he became a citizen when the wheels of the plane hit the runway at JFK.

Since he's only three years old, he's not the least bit concerned with the implications of dual citizenship because he has no idea of what 'citizenship' is.

[Bridget Burke]

Interestingly, I have no problem with it.

I live in Australia, I vote here and pay taxes, and I'm a citizen. I'm an American by birth, where, incidentally, I'm still required to pay taxes, even though I don't live there. I have a deep and abiding interest in how America does, as a result, and thus I retain my citizenship and I vote there.

It's not hard, I'm a bit of both. Sorry it bothers you.

Well, if the US & Australia go to war--against each other, not as allies--you'll have to make a decision.

Until then, I'm not bothered.

[Driver8]

I thought South Africa was one of the ones where you do have to renounce their citizenship if you take another? (unless maybe they've changed it since) Pretty sure that's what happened with my mother-in-law on taking Australian citizenship (and that my wife only got to keep her SA citizenship because she was underage at the time, so technically wasn't able to consent to giving up the citizenship)South Africa will let you keep your South African citizenship if you fill out a form letting them know you're going to get another citizenship. Otherwise there isn't a requirement to do something to renounce, but rather you simply lose your citizenship upon gaining the other. Of course, they really wouldn't know so I'm not sure how enforcement of that works.

[irishgirl]

I have both Irish and British citizenship.
It's useful, and I don't particularly want to choose one or the other. It certainly comes in useful if you can't find one of your passports the morning you're due to go on holiday!
Ireland, being a neutral country, is quite a good passport to travel under if you're going to an volatile area, while Britain has a much greater consular presence should you require that assistance.*

My mother and grandmother are naturalised British citizens. My grandmother was born in South Africa in 1915, my mother, born in 1950 in Zimbabwe (then Southern Rhodesia) had German citizenship from her father (who left Germany in the 1930s). My aunt left Zimbabwe for Australia and is in the process of becoming naturalised.

Where you live, where you're from, where you pay taxes and where your allegiance lie can all be different places- I'm cool with that.


* this, however did not work out well for Brian Keenan (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Keenan_(writer))- he was trying to convince Islamic Jihad he was an Irish citizen, and of no value as a hostage, meanwhile Margaret Thatcher had publicly claimed him as British. Which meant that the hostage takers thought he was a spy. Nice one Maggie.

[manila]

I have both UK (through birthplace) and NZ citizenship (from my pops)

I keep both passports valid and don't see any clash of allegiance unless its in sport ( England in soccer and NZ in Rugby)

As for the last ten years, I have lived in neither country and am out of touch with both countries' national issues. I have lived in both countries but If I had to give up citizenship of one of them then I do know which I would choose. But by and large I don't ever see it being an issue. I always travel on my kiwi passport.

( kiwis can get a free visa on arrival to Turkey!!)

I tend to find myself a foreigner in most places that I work or stay. I try to blend in :)

[Anaamika]

I wonder now why I had to give up Indian citizenship. Not that I care that much, but it seems to me I should have been able to keep it; I was born there, and spent four years there before I emigrated.

Ah, I found a great website on it. India does not allow dual citizenship, but they allow "overseas citizenship of India" which is a sort of lesser form of such.

:wanders off to see if she can apply for it:

[Skammer]

My wife was born in Canada to an American father and Canadian mother, which as far as I know gives her dual citizenship. I don't think the U.S. officially recognizes or cares that she is also a citizen of Canada, though. I fail to see the problem.

[E-Sabbath]

On the matter of dual citizenship, and Obama, many people have been arguing that if he was granted Indonesian citizenship, then he lost his American citizenship. Ignoring the fact that he wasn't granted said citizenship, I have been greatly amused by this concept.

Picture it. America, 1980. The USSR grants Ronald Reagan citizenship against his will.

[Giles]

Picture it. America, 1980. The USSR grants Ronald Reagan citizenship against his will.
If a hostile country gave an Australian member of parliament citizenship against his or her will, then I suspect that the High Court of Australia would have no problem in saying that the MP was not, under Subsection 44(i) of the Constitution, really "under any acknowledgement of allegiance, obedience, or adherence to a foreign power," since the MP did not acquire it by birth or by a voluntary act.

[cherry]

I've got triple citizenship and not needing a visa to most places is a good thing although I only use one passport.

[Sattua]

Hmmm. It does sort of bother me, though not enough to do anything about it. I think my problem probably stems from knowing too many people who are gaming immigration systems via fake marriages, etc. Makes me want to tell them to get offa my lawn. Or, as my dad used to say, "decide if you want to be in or out, and stay there."

[tetranz]

I wonder now why I had to give up Indian citizenship. Not that I care that much, but it seems to me I should have been able to keep it; I was born there, and spent four years there before I emigrated.

Ah, I found a great website on it. India does not allow dual citizenship, but they allow "overseas citizenship of India" which is a sort of lesser form of such.

:wanders off to see if she can apply for it:

But... I think countries like India, Japan and previously Australia that "don't allow dual citizenship" only apply it to "outgoing citizens". That is, if one of their citizens become a citizen of another country then the first country effectively disowns them and they are no longer a citizen.

I'm unsure if any country truly disallows dual citizenship for "incoming" citizens. If they do then how do they handle it? I'm sure you're not expected to renounce your citizenship of the old country before being sworn in to the new. That would make you stateless for a while. So... do they give you "provisional citizenship" provided that you return within a set time with proof that you've renounced the old or what?"

My guess is that the "you must give up your old citizenship" just doesn't happen but I've heard somewhat vague stories along the lines of "my grandfather had give up ABC to become XYZ" but nobody seems to know how it was handled.

Regarding Australia, I remember people saying if you want to become Australian, make sure it's the last citizenship you take because you would lose it if you got another after that. I guess it was a bit strange in some ways. The only Australians with a right to be dual citizens would have been new arrivals. A fair dinkum natural born Australian wouldn't have had that right. None of it applies now because Australia has changed its law.

[Waxwinged]

Interestingly, I have no problem with it.

I live in Australia, I vote here and pay taxes, and I'm a citizen. I'm an American by birth, where, incidentally, I'm still required to pay taxes, even though I don't live there. I have a deep and abiding interest in how America does, as a result, and thus I retain my citizenship and I vote there.

It's not hard, I'm a bit of both. Sorry it bothers you.


That, minus the Australia part. It's pretty damn hard for a person to renounce their heritage completely.

[Yookeroo]

Hmmm. It does sort of bother me, though not enough to do anything about it. I think my problem probably stems from knowing too many people who are gaming immigration systems via fake marriages, etc.

I know this as a big deal in sitcoms, but is this a real issue?

[JRDelirious]

I know this as a big deal in sitcoms, but is this a real issue?

At least in the USA for quite a while now marriage to an American has not been quite the "easy ticket" that the stereotypical romantic comedy makes it out to be. It moves the spouse to a better relative (ha) position in the immigration queue but does NOT take him/her out of it altogether. Cites from an immigration-law firm (http://www.andrewslaw.net/immigration/myths_facts.shtml).

IIUIC, for a US citizen to sponsor the immigration and/or naturalization of a spouse or relative, the US citizen has to be resident in the USA (or at least be applying to bring back the other person upon returning to the USA). Seems the dual status gives him/her no advantage save perhaps for ease of mobility for him/herself while running around doing the paperwork, but that's just my layman's perception.

[Eats_Crayons]

Some countries do care. When I was a young Moon I had a friend who was born in Japan as her parents were working there but was also a Canadian. Apparently when she turned 21 she was going to have to make a choice as Japan doesn't support dual citizenship for adults.Her choice may be made and she may choose Japan, but Japan can't force Canada to revoke her Canadian citizenship. So the Japanese officials can tell themselves "She chose Japan and renounced her Canadian citizenship. She is a Japanese citizen only!" Meanwhile, back in Canada the government has paperwork that says she's still Canadian.

Japan does have by which you can present paperwork from a foreign government that verifies that you have officially relinquished your citizenship. So one COULD get Canadian paperwork that says "Moon's friend is no longer Canadian" (which I understand is not easy to do because so few do it) but Japan, like the U.S. allows you to just swear an oath to be a Japanese national only. Even if that is 100% your intention, you're still in the Canadian books as a Canadian.

FTR, I'm an American who was born in Canada. My parents never recorded my birth with the U.S. government, so I was Canadian-only for my entire childhood. In my late teens or early twenties, we got my American passport by presenting all my parents' citizenship information to the consulate. I now have my U.S. citizenship and I did not have to take an oath or anything, nor did I have to give up my Canadian citizenship.

[Sattua]

I know this as a big deal in sitcoms, but is this a real issue?

Off the top of my head, I know three couples who have done this. One of them is involved in a sort of chain, whereby the original person married, got a green card, got citizenship, and is now about to marry another person so that person can get a green card (meanwhile being romantically involved with someone else).

[Driver8]

At least in the USA for quite a while now marriage to an American has not been quite the "easy ticket" that the stereotypical romantic comedy makes it out to be. It moves the spouse to a better relative (ha) position in the immigration queue but does NOT take him/her out of it altogether. Cites from an immigration-law firm (http://www.andrewslaw.net/immigration/myths_facts.shtml).This isn't quite true. For many categories of family based immigration sponsorship there are annual quotas, with far more applicants then spaces available. Your case gets allocated a priority date (based on when you filed) and you can only expect forward movement on your case when the date is newer than the published date for your category. For example, looking at the February status (http://www.travel.state.gov/visa/bulletin/bulletin_5228.html) a Mexican brother of a US Citizen would only expect them to start processing his green card case if he had filed before 01 January 1996. Typically when people talk about immigration queues this is what they are talking about: these quotas exist for certain family and employment based categories.

Marriage to a US citizen, as well as being the parent of a US citizen, is a family category that has no quota, so there is no waiting in such a queue. Of course, this "no waiting" is theoretical, since in practice the administration, background checks, paperwork, etc takes time, and this obviously does depend on how many other cases they are processing, but in theory you are eligible for the green card benefit and can apply for it as soon as you are married. My case took about 4 months. It looks like my current citizenship application is heading for 4-6 months as well. Of course I was already in the US on a work permit so that may have made things easier: the processing may be more complex if you're doing this abroad through consulates, etc. Thankfully I don't have any experience with that.

[TokyoBayer]

In the old days if you were an immigrant who wanted to become an American citizen, one of the things you had to do was give up all allegiance to a foreign country. Nowadays, it is apparently possible to become a citizen of the U.S. and still retain citizenship in another country. I don't approve of this. Am I alone?:rolleyes: Not too surprised to see xenophobic attitudes among Americans. Fortunately, not all people are scared of 'da for'ners.

I live in Japan with my Taiwanese wife and my children are dual citizens of Taiwan and America.

This isn't the 1600s anymore. People move around the world.

Off the top of my head, I know three couples who have done this. One of them is involved in a sort of chain, whereby the original person married, got a green card, got citizenship, and is now about to marry another person so that person can get a green card (meanwhile being romantically involved with someone else).And the plural of anecdotes is?

That issue, if it really is an issue, is one of fake marriages and not dual citizenship.

[Peremensoe]

It's pretty damn hard for a person to renounce their heritage completely.

Renouncing allegiance and citizenship isn't, or shouldn't be thought of as, the same as renouncing heritage and nationality. The former is a political relationship, subject to change, perhaps more than once. The latter is what you were born into or grew up with.

[Peremensoe]

I'm sure you're not expected to renounce your citizenship of the old country before being sworn in to the new. That would make you stateless for a while.

That sounds exactly appropriate to me, actually. Divest yourself of the old relationship before taking up the new one.

[SecondJudith]

That sounds exactly appropriate to me, actually. Divest yourself of the old relationship before taking up the new one.

Um. Considering that the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights includes the right to a nation, and that statelessness is an awful deal that precludes (among other things) an inability to travel, have photo ID (no alcohol or cigarettes for you! and forget driving!), I'm not sure this "mandatory statelessness before taking up any new citizenship" scheme has legs. There was a Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness for a reason.

[bengangmo]

I have both UK (through birthplace) and NZ citizenship (from my pops)

I keep both passports valid and don't see any clash of allegiance unless its in sport ( England in soccer and NZ in Rugby)

As for the last ten years, I have lived in neither country and am out of touch with both countries' national issues. I have lived in both countries but If I had to give up citizenship of one of them then I do know which I would choose. But by and large I don't ever see it being an issue. I always travel on my kiwi passport.

( kiwis can get a free visa on arrival to Turkey!!)

I tend to find myself a foreigner in most places that I work or stay. I try to blend in :)

Considering that England canes NZ in soccer and the reverse is true for Rugby (unless that cheating scumbag Wilkinson is playing:D) its not likely to be much of a conflict.

My daughter currently has dual citizenship, I understand from the NZ point of view she's supposed to choose one at age 16 or so. But I also understand its not enforced or checked upon so it doesn't really matter. For her second citizenship though I am pretty sure they only allow one - so they would try to "force" her to renounce NZ citizenship.

I think if I were ever to take up citizenship her, I would be required to prove that I have renounced my "other" citizenship.

[Peremensoe]

Um. Considering that the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights includes the right to a nation, and that statelessness is an awful deal that precludes (among other things) an inability to travel, have photo ID (no alcohol or cigarettes for you! and forget driving!), I'm not sure this "mandatory statelessness before taking up any new citizenship" scheme has legs. There was a Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness for a reason.

Please. We're talking about people who are voluntarily giving up one citizenship in order to obtain another. The transactions might be done the same hour. For that matter, the first might only be activated upon the finalization of the second. The point is that the new state could mandate renunciation of prior citizenships if they wanted to.

[Raguleader]

:rolleyes: Not too surprised to see xenophobic attitudes among Americans.

Indeed, why should you be? Xenophobic attitudes can be found amongst any nationality if you meet the right (wrong?) people. :rolleyes:

And the plural of anecdotes is?

Data! No wait, that's not the right answer, is it?:D

As an interesting note, when I got orders for Korea, amongst the impressive stack of paperwork I had to burrow through, there was a form for canceling orders based on being a Korean citizen (typically due to parentage). Since the Republic of Korea has a mandatory service requirement for its citizens, American servicemembers who meet the requirements for Korean citizenship are subject to basically being drafted into the Republic of Korea armed forces to serve their country (no, the OTHER one). This is kind of a curious thing given that the only reason said servicemember would find themselves going to Korea in the first place in this instance would be to defend the country against its neighbor.

I'm guessing the option to simply cancel the assignment on that basis was considered the most diplomatic way to deal with the issue. For those who are curious, I'm not a Korean by any measure, so I simply filed said paperwork in the "Mechanical File".

[tetranz]

I'm sure you're not expected to renounce your citizenship of the old country before being sworn in to the new.

That sounds exactly appropriate to me, actually. Divest yourself of the old relationship before taking up the new one.

That might sound reasonable but how would you do it in practice?

You obviously can't fly to the old country, renounce and fly back because what passport would you use to get back?

You might be able to do it at an embassy within the new country but not all countries have embassies in every other country.

It sounds like the UK at least won't allow someone to renounce their citizenship if that would make them stateless. I wouldn't be surprised if there is some sort of international agreement about that.

[FuzzyOgre]

Dual citizen ship is an enhancement to personal freedom. It is one freedom that a state cannot grant on its own.

[Martini Enfield]

My daughter currently has dual citizenship, I understand from the NZ point of view she's supposed to choose one at age 16 or so. But I also understand its not enforced or checked upon so it doesn't really matter.

New Zealand allows dual citizenship; according to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, "There are no restrictions on New Zealand citizens also holding the citizenship of another country (http://www.nzembassy.com/netherlands/new-zealanders-overseas/new-zealand-documents/citizenship)(ie. to be dual nationals or citizens)".

[tetranz]

I understand from the NZ point of view she's supposed to choose one at age 16 or so.

I agree with Martini. That doesn't sound right. NZ has requirements for citizenship but whether or not you're a citizen of another country isn't one of them.

[Driver8]

Please. We're talking about people who are voluntarily giving up one citizenship in order to obtain another. The transactions might be done the same hour. For that matter, the first might only be activated upon the finalization of the second. The point is that the new state could mandate renunciation of prior citizenships if they wanted to.I'm guessing you've never been through an immigration process. Or within 10 miles of one for that matter. The transactions might be done in the same hour? What a joke.

While the citizenship application seems to be faster these days then it has in the past, it is still at least a 4 month process in the US. Renunciation of citizenship with the previous country is not likely to be faster, if even an option.

It is inconceivable that any country would implement an immensely costly infrastructure to coordinate with every single other country on the Earth a mechanism to revoke an old citizenship on acquiring a new one.

The result of a state mandating an actual renunciation of an old citizenship is that many people simply won't be able to become citizens because their old government either by choice or by incompetence has no practical mechanism for renunciation. In addition the renunciation would have to occur after citizenship was granted, otherwise the person would be stateless for a period of time.

It is possible for a country to state that if its own citizen takes on a foreign citizenship it loses theirs. Many countries do this. My own, South Africa, does this unless you specifically notify them you're taking on new citizenship. However it is impractical for a country to state that you have to specifically renounce your citizenship before becoming their citizen. The best they can do is ask you to declare allegiance only to them, but the old country is in no way obligated to acknowledge that and will most likely still consider you a citizen.

[Driver8]

Dual citizen ship is an enhancement to personal freedom. It is one freedom that a state cannot grant on its own.I agree with this. I understand that in a world of varying economic conditions completely open borders is impractical, but I welcome any movement towards a society with more freedom of movement around the world. Dual citizenship is a useful tool for that, and one that does not require states to sacrifice their rights to decide who does and does not get to enter their jurisdiction.

[Martini Enfield]

I agree with Martini. That doesn't sound right. NZ has requirements for citizenship but whether or not you're a citizen of another country isn't one of them.

Indeed. In fact, there are so many New Zealanders with dual citizenship out there (like me) that one of the "Nationality" options on the Arrival Card when you fly into New Zealand is "I am a New Zealand Citizen travelling on a foreign passport".

[TokyoBayer]

Indeed, why should you be? Xenophobic attitudes can be found amongst any nationality if you meet the right (wrong?) people. :rolleyes:That snark should have been more directly pointed to that specific American. I tried to phrase it as such with among as I find it a little less among Europeans. Certainly it's not rare here in Japan.
Since the Republic of Korea has a mandatory service requirement for its citizens, American servicemembers who meet the requirements for Korean citizenship are subject to basically being drafted into the Republic of Korea armed forces to serve their country (no, the OTHER one).Taiwan also have mandatory service requirements for male citizens so that's something our son would may face.

[Raguleader]

That snark should have been more directly pointed to that specific American. I tried to phrase it as such with among as I find it a little less among Europeans. Certainly it's not rare here in Japan.
Taiwan also have mandatory service requirements for male citizens so that's something our son would may face.

To be honest, I find myself mildly curious as to how many Korean-Americans have ended up serving in the ROK armed forces due to that rule, either by intent or by oversight. Would be interesting to run into one.

"Anyoughhaseo!"

"Howdy!"

"Huh?"

"I said Howdy! I'm from Houston!"

"But... why are you in a Korean uniform?"

"Funny story, I was really drunk during that whole period when I got my assignment rip..."

[Kyla]

To be honest, I find myself mildly curious as to how many Korean-Americans have ended up serving in the ROK armed forces due to that rule, either by intent or by oversight. Would be interesting to run into one.

Not sure about Korea, but I know loads of Israeli/American dual citizens who've had to wrangle out of serving in the army. It's apparently not that difficult for people who've never lived in Israel, or haven't spent significant time there. But they're very strict about it, and people who are of army age and aren't serving have to carry their deferments around with them all the time. A rather naive and foolish friend who was a dual citizen tried to go to Egypt with me and another friend on her (brand new) American passport, when she'd entered the country on her Israeli passport. My other friend and I didn't realize what she was doing until we were well on our way to Egypt and despite our worries, she was unconcerned. Of course, when we got to the border, the following ensued.

Them: Why doesn't your passport have any stamps?
Her: I entered Israel on my Israeli passport.
Them: You're an Israeli citizen?
Her: Yeah.
Them: Where's your army deferment?
Her: It's in my Israeli passport.
Them: Yeah, you're not leaving the country.

She cried and cried and cried but strangely enough, the Israeli border guards aren't particularly softhearted and wouldn't let her go to Egypt.

[Saint Cad]

I think dual citizenship is fine. I thinking of moving to a country where you must live there as a productive member of society for 5 years before becoming naturalized. I'm not saying I will become a dual citizen, but it is nice to have the protection after building a life there to not have to give it all up because your work visa is not renewed or the country simply says, "Get the fuck out!"

[kayT]

It's not clear to me why those of us opposed to dual citizenship are being accused of xenophobia.