A number of news organizations are repeating Time’s story about Madeleine Albright considering running for president of the Czech Republic after Vaclav Havel steps down. Some of the the stories mention that a few Americans have become government officials in other countries. All of those people, though, were ordinary citizens in the U.S. Wouldn’t the United States object to a Secretary of State (or someone else with access to classified material) working for a foreign goverment—even an ally?
They’re talking about her doing this after her term as Secretary of State expires, so, she can do what she wants then. Of course, she’d have to renounce her citizenship, since no American citizen can hold office in another government.
If it jams, force it; if it breaks, it needed replacing anyway.
I understand that this is after her term. But she’d presumably still know a lot of secret stuff.
I understand that this is after her term. But she’d presumably still know a lot of secret stuff. To put it another way: if the embattled John Deutch (former CIA director) decided he’d had enough of Uncle Sam, could he go and work for somebody else?
Ben raises an interesting point. After all, her knowledge of classified information isn’t going to disappear (or become immediately obsolete) just because her tenure as Sec’y of State ends.
Let’s say an issue comes up between the Czech Republic and another nation in the area. She knows something classified about that nation or its leadership as a result of her U.S. service that would give the Czechs an advantage in their dealings with that other country. Does she use it or remain silent? And what about the inevitable dealings that she woould have to have with the U.S.? Sounds like a conflict of interest to me.
Weird. Ben’s last two posts, bearing times from 2 hours ago, were not there when I wrote the above reply. (And my typing is not THAT slow!)
I don’t know if I’d call Madeleine Albright a broad. Then again, she’s not really a dame or a skirt or a chick either.
Broad, chick, Secretary of State… IMO, she looks like Grandpa Munster.
Cave Diem! Carpe Canem!
I’ve read that the rule is “You lose your citizenship if you hold *certain[/] offices in another government.” I tried to find a list of the offices that would cause you to lose citizenship, but couldn’t find it. Has anyone seen such a list? I’m not convinced that president of the Czech Republic would be an office that would cause you to lose your nationality.
But unless dual citizenship is tolerated in both countries, wouldn’t you think that the Czechs might have something to say about having a president with an American passport?
Ask and ye shall receive, straight from the Master:
www.straightdope.com/columns/970627.html www.straightdope.com/columns/970808.html
Thank you for the links, andros, but I don’t see anywhere in the columns a discussion about which foreign offices an American citizen isn’t allowed to hold.
Sorry, Jacques, I was responding to android’s off-the-cuff “unless dual citizenship is tolerated” line. I actually had a followup to that extent, but my ISP ate it.
Have no answer to your question, yet, but I’m talking to an ex-pat friend of mine (now Israeli) about it.
-andros-
Unless I’m missing something, I don’t think Ms. Albright would automatically lose her citizenship just by becoming President of the Czech Republic. The relevant provision appears to be:
So, there are two elements to losing citizenship. First, you have to do certain things, like swear allegiance or take an office under a foreign nation, but the second requirement is that you have to do it with the intention of renouncing U.S. citizenship.
Becoming President of the Czech Republic would likely qualify under the “office” requirement, and I assume she would have to swear an oath of allegiance, but that would not be enough to make her lose her U.S. citizenship. She would also have to do it with the intention of renouncing, as set out in the opening words of para. (a).
I would be surprised if someone like Ms. Albright would voluntarily renounce her U.S. citizenship.
and the stars o’erhead were dancing heel to toe
Thank you, jti. Now where did you find that information? I need to hone my www searching skills.
I’m relieved. Now when I go on vacation, and in a drunken celebration gather a group of disaffected locals, start a rebel movement and fight my way to president of the country, I know I’ll always be welcome back in the US of A.
American citizen Milan Panic served a term as either president or prime minister (I forget) of Yugoslavia in the early 1990s. Congress passed a law excepting him from the requirement of foregoing his American citizenship.
There was also a case around that time of a US Army general who was asked to head up the armed forces of one of the Baltic countries. I believe the Army told him no.
Wasn’t Eamon de Valera a US citizen? I’m presuming that he took Irish (and possibly British) nationality at some stage in his life, but he was born in the US and, IIRC, his connection with the US was one of the reasons he wasn’t executed in 1916—the British Government thought it might cause a diplomatic incident.
TomH,
According to Chambers Biographical Dictionary, De Valera was born in Brooklyn, New York, of Irish-Spanish parentage, in 1882. In his youth, he moved to Ireland, where he was raised by an uncle and entered the nationalist movement.
The entry doesn’t specifically address the citizenship issue, but he would have been an American by virtue of his birth in the U.S.
I’m not quite sure how the rules worked back then, but I think that if his father was Irish, he would have been born a British subject, by inheritance. Britain at that time recognised all children of British subjects born abroad as British subjects themselves.
If his father was Spanish and his mother Irish, I doubt that he would be a British subject by birth, since I think the children of mixed marriages at that time acquired their father’s nationality, not their mother’s.
If he wasn’t a British subject by birth, he could have been naturalised when he moved to Ireland and was raised by his uncle.
And, you are correct about his fate after the Easter Uprising. He was convicted by court-martial and sentenced to death, but the sentence was commuted after the intervention by the U.S. Consul. As senior survivor of the Uprising, he was elected to Parliament upon his release in 1917.
and the stars o’erhead were dancing heel to toe
Arnold,
You’re welcome.
The source that I normally use for American statutes, constitutions, etc. is the Legal Information Institute, operated by Cornell Law School. It has links to damn near everything, including the United States Code.
(By the way, the home page for the LII doesn’t like MacJava on IE5, if that’s an issue for you. Not all of the page shows up. I use Netscape to surf the LII.)
and the stars o’erhead were dancing heel to toe
This is correct, at least in the case of Britain. Any child born to a British woman outside of Britain before 1984 is not considered a British national; however, the child is if the father is British.
~Harborina
“Don’t Do It.”