I’m torn on whether this deserves to be here, but the OP is in FQ and my response is very much IMHO (bordering on WTF?), so here it goes:
I’m sorry, but no. Systemic failures are not a #bothsides problem. It is a systemic problem. This framing is particularly detestable:
“partly a situation where many Roma see no benefit to engaging in the bureaucracy of the country they live in”
…and…
“There is ‘othering’ on both sides, it’s not as simple as a ‘them’ being denied citizenship, it’s a group of largely former undocumented refugees who either don’t have the required knowledge or information or -often justifiably- are unwilling to engage with the system.“
…and…
“but if they can’t provide any proof at all of that, it’s going to be difficult. This is especially likely to be the case for those living a nomadic lifestyle with no record of residency or bills.”
No. Fuck that. These are entirely problems of the state’s making, and could be solved unilaterally through state action. Laws on citizenship and nationality are not derived from some natural, immutable truth. States choose what qualifies someone as a citizen. States choose what evidence (documentary or otherwise) will be required for someone to prove their citizenship. States choose what rights will be granted to citizens and denied others.
This is a particularly pressing concern in the United States right now because one of the best remedies to this kind of systemic statelessness and permanent marginalization that has affected groups like the Roma is to adhere to a regime of jus solis birthright citizenship. It’s one of the few things the US got right after the Civil War, and that a bunch of fascists are trying so hard these last few years to undermine it now should horrify us all, not get repeatedly sane-washed by news media as a matter for debate.
We in the United States are totally fucked if the wrong Supreme Court Justice dies in the next 2.5 years (at least). (ETA: ok, we are even more totally fucked if the wrong Justice dies).