(This was one of my essays written for Global Social Issues module in University. In this month of August where a number of nations that are connected with me celebrate their National Day, I seem to ponder a lot on the meaning of Citizenship. And, so I thought I'll share my amateur piece of work)
When I read Sultany’s description of the Arabs in Israel as ‘citizens without citizenship’ (Rouhana and Sultany, 2003), I was bewildered. How is it possible for a person to be citizen without citizenship? And, as I tried to examine the flaw in his statement I realized that the complexity actually lies in the definition of ‘citizenship’.
In his classic essay, British sociologist T.H.Marshall defined citizenship as “a status bestowed on those who are full members of a community. All who possess the status are equal to the rights and duties with which the status is endowed” (cited by Lister, 2003). Reading Sultany’s description of the Arabs in Israel against this definition, I interpret that the Arabs are not ‘full members’ of Israel. And, this is de facto true.
Citizenship for Arabs and Jews in Israel was never equal (Rouhana and Sultany, 2003). According to a special provision made in the Nationality Law, those (Arabs) who remained in Israel from the establishment of the State in 1948 until the enactment of the Nationality Law of 1952 became Israeli citizens by residence (Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 2001). However Jews, being the majority in Israel, define the character of the state (Shamir and Sullivan, 1985). Therefore any person who is not Jew cannot be a full member of the Israeli community. And, I guess this explains why the Arabs, as Marshall puts it, are not treated ‘equal to the rights and duties with which the status (of citizenship) is endowed.’
Given Israel’s self-identification as an ethnic Jewish state, it is not surprising that the Jewish ethnocentrism has been placed as the most important ideological principle that guides the Israeli citizenship policies (Rouhana and Sultany, 2003). But, should citizenship in any state be based on ethnicity or religion? I guess it is neither possible nor fair to make a ‘right or wrong’ judgment on nations that have chosen this direction. When ethnicity or religion is part of the very definition of a state, I think it is a natural choice. And, of course the choice does not come without ramifications.
The general outcome of such a choice is discrimination. For instance, the Arabs in Israel who form 16% of the population (Rouhana and Sultany, 2003), are citizens but they are excluded from various opportunities and benefits by the government (Gold, 2007). Similarly in Japan, although the state has conferred a wide range of citizenship rights on Korean community, the Koreans do not enjoy full citizenship (Chung, 2006). Therefore it appears that the approach of these countries on citizenship is objectionable.
However, I think we need to move away from the conceptual and theoretical definition of citizenship. It is not practical to expect nation states to treat all persons on their land as equals. Since the times of Athenian democracy and the Roman Republic the core meaning of citizenship has been status of membership in a self-governing political community (Baubok, 2006).
As Lister (2003) puts it, “an understanding of citizenship in terms of membership underlines that what is involved is not simply a set of legal rules but a set of social relationship between individuals and the state and between individual states”. In countries such as Israel and Japan where a particular ethnicity or religion is dominant in the demographic majority, such ‘social relationships’ are even stronger. Therefore in protecting the interest of the majority, the states have little choice in widening the definition of citizenship.
To arrive at an exhaustive and comprehensive definition of ‘citizenship’ is difficult (Lister, 2003). And, like I mentioned theoretical definitions cannot be used to scrutinize the approach countries such as Israel and Japan. Hence, when we examine the notion of citizenship in any state it is important to bear in mind the nature of the population in that country. Maybe that will help us understand why the Arabs in Israel or the Koreans in Japan are referred to as “citizens without citizenship”.
References
Baubok, Rainer. 2006. “Citizenship and migration – concepts and controversies” pp. 15-31 in Migration and Citizenship: Legal status, rights and political participation. Amsterdam:Amsterdam University Press
Gold, Steven J. 2007. “Israeli Emigration Policy” pp.283-304 in Citizenship and Those Who Leave: The Politics of Emigration and Expatriation, edited by Green, Nancy L and Weil, Francois. Urbana; Chicago: University of Illinois Press
Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs. 2001. Acquisition of Israeli Nationality. Retrieved April 7, 2010 from http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/MFAArchive/2000_2009/2001/8/Acquisition%20of%20Israeli%20Nationality
Chung, Erin Aeran. 2006. “The Korean Citizen in Japanese Civil Society” p.128 in Japan’s Diversity Dilemmas: Ethnicity, Citizenship, and Education. Soo im Lee, Stephen Murphy- Shigematsy and Harumi Befu (eds). United States of America: iUniverse
Lister, Ruth. 2003. Citizenship: Feminist Perspectives. New York: Palgrave Macmillan Rouhana, Nadim N and Sultany, Nimber. 2003. “ Redrawing the Boundaries of Citizenhip: Israel’s New Hegemony” pp.5-22 in Journal of Palestine Studies, Vol. 33, No.1 (Autumn, 2003). University of California Press. Retrieved April 5, 2010, from http://www.jstor.org/stable/3247405
Shamir, Michal and Sullivan, John L. 1985. “Jews and Arabs in Israel: Everybody Hates Somebody, Sometime” pp.283-305 in The Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol.29, No.2 (June,1985). Sage Publications Inc. Retrieved April 6, 2010 from http://www.jstor.org/stable/174102
2 comments:
very well written.. admire your writing.. keep writing more n more...
there is another country that comes into mind when mentioning 'citizens without citizenship', Sri Lanka. although the Tamils have fought for their equal rights it still remains a lost battle. the lesser citizens of the country usually are to adjust and blend in, else they are made to pay for dearly!
quite similar to the caste system in India. Even though the law identifies all as one, religion does severely poke its head when decision making, specifically hinduism.
It was only yesterday that I read about a woman whose marriage would not be accepted or recognised by the law since she was of the Dasi lineage. So much for a self proclaimed secular country!
Post a Comment