Citizenship, Nationhood, and Non-Territoriality: Transnational Participation in Europe Author(s): Riva Kastoryano Source: PS: Political Science and

Politics, Vol. 38, No. 4 (Oct., 2005), pp. 693-696 Published by: American Political Science Association Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/30044352 Accessed: 12/12/2009 18:16
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=apsa. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

American Political Science Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to PS: Political Science and Politics.

http://www.jstor.org

and Nationhood, NonCitizenship, Transnational Territoriality: Participation

in

Europe
Introduction
Since the 1980s,the questionof citizenship has takenrootas a majorthemein the social sciences andas the focus of juridical, political, debatesin all democratic sosocial, andcultural cieties. In Europe, citizenshiphas takendifferent in its rhetoric, shapesanddefinitions ideology, andpracticewithregard to immigrants' incorinto nation-states andtheirexpansion poration of politicalparticipation beyondboundaries to includea relatingto home andhost country broadEuropean is also an space.Citizenship issue for European construction itself. Within nation-states has beenexpressedin citizenship different domainsextendingfromthe national to the civil society,even though community only "legal" citizenshipallowsthe full particiandgroupsin the politipationof individuals cal community. At the European level, despite the transnational of immigrants participation of the European encouraged by the verynature Union andits supranational institutions andde of dual facto expansion the claim citizenship, for equalrecognition as citizens that underlies Kastoryrano, of immigrants remains withinthe framework of the legitimacyof the stateof residenceandcitizenship. The questionof citizenship therefore opens the way to negotiations of identitiesbetween statesandimmigrants 2002). (Kastoryano Withinnation-states the strugglefor equality thatcitizenship entailsis extendedto different of interest domains,oftenturning negotiations into negotiations of identity. Forstates,it is a the meansof inclusion questionof negotiating of immigrants into the politicalcommunity on the basis of a new equilibrium between structures andnational institutions. community Forindividuals, citizenshipbecomesa principle of equalityanda way to struggleagainst "exclusion." It political,social, andcultural becomesa way to claimrecognition as a "citiwhichthe attachment andloyalty zen,"through to botha nationalandan ethniccommunity areexpressed, therebycombininga liberaland republican participation (Dagger1997). Suchan of citizenship raisesthe question understanding of the relevance of the triplelinkbetween andidentity, hencethe citizenship, nationality, link betweenpoliticalcommunity andcultural the formeras a sourceof rightsand community, andthe latteras a sourceof identity. legitimacy, At the European of a new level, the construction creates an for politicalspace opportunity action beyondboundaries, leadingto transnational structures of representation andto new with states-home andhost-and negotiations introduces the questionof territoriality with to thepracticeof citizenship andits regard relationto nationhood. This articleexploresthesecomplex articulations of belongingandthe actions generated by the questionof citizenshipand andpolitical analyzesthe linkbetweencultural belonging,betweenrightsandidentityandthe relevance of territoriality in relationto nation andnew expressions of nationalism raisedby formsof transnational participation.

Citizenship, Nationality, and Identity

The conceptsof citizenshipandnationality, two interdependent and"interchangeable" (Leca 1992) conceptswithinthe framework of a nation-state, aredefinedaboveall by in a politicalcommunity. This membership takesshapethrough membership rightsand dutiesthatareembodied in the veryconceptof citizenship.Its implementation by law implies the integration or the incorporation of the intothe national with "foreigner" community which he or she is supposed to sharethe same moralandpoliticalvalues.Moreover, she or he is supposed to adoptor even to "appropriate" historical references as a proofof belonging andloyaltyto the foundingprinciples of the to Weberis the only nation,whichaccording bornof modernity. community Debateson citizenshipandnationhood reveal whatever historical preciselysuch expectations, andjuridicalshapeis givento interpretation citizenship.Basedon the exampleof France andGermany, have citizenshipandnationhood been analyzedin ideal-typical termsopposinga culturalandethnicunderstanding of the nation to a civic andpoliticalone (Brubaker 1992; Dumont1991).The reality,however, is more of complex.Obviouslysuchrepresentations the nationhaveexplained,andto some extent in justified,policiesandlaws of citizenship democratic states.But lately,the experience of immigration andsettlement alongwiththe claim for recognition of cultural particularities andequalcitizenship havechangedthe of citizenship, andcarried its understanding practicebeyondits legal definition. A normative versionof citizenshipembodies

by Riva

Centre National d Sla Recherche Scientifique

thepolitical strategies

PSOnline www.apsanet.org

693

values and action, "responsibility and civic virtues" (Kymlikka and Norman 1994). Citizenship is therefore not limited to political status and rights related to a national identity; it is also an identity that is developed through direct or indirect participation in the name of a shared interest for individuals and groups, immigrants or not. It is expressed through the engagement of the individual for the common good.' Such an engagement can take place within voluntary associations, through community activities (local or broader cultural, ethnic, and religious activities), in short, through an engagement toward the civil society as well as the political community. Citizenship is interpreted,then, as a participation in the public space, defined as a space of communication, of shared power, as well as a space of political socialization and where a "citizen's identity" is acquired and constitutes a political resource for action and negotiation. Therefore, a normative approach to citizenship extends its understanding and its expression in social and cultural domains to include them into the political. According to Kymlicka (2002), the extension of citizenship to ethnic communities today is a way to integrate these communities in a common national community, as was the case with the reconsideration of citizenship with regard to the participation of social class analyzed by T. H. Marshall. On the other hand, actors devise strategies for participation according to legal citizenship applied in nation-states. In France and Germany, for example, immigrants develop different tools and devise different strategies for political participation. In France, access to citizenship is based on a relatively easy process of naturalizationand the practice of jus solis for the young generation immigrants, leading to direct participation whereby they can act as an electoral force. In Germany, on the other hand, until very recently restrictive citizenship laws included the interdiction of dual citizenship for those who wished to maintain the citizenship of their country of origin, prompting activists to develop "compensatory" strategies.2 Such strategies entail a search for indirect participation that implies a participation in the civil society through mobilization within voluntary associations as a way to assert a collective presence affecting public opinion and political decisions on their behalf. However such a "social citizenship" that initiates the exercise of citizenship and includes foreigners in its existing corporate structurestranslates into an indirect participation with regard to purely political citizenship.3 Only legal citizenship carries the right to equal direct participation in the political community in the full sense of the term. It is acquired, for foreigners, through the process of naturalization,a process that takes into consideration the length of their stay, their contribution to the society, and a "natural"identification with the national community. A citizenship that expresses itself in both community and national institutions runs against the traditional analysis of republican citizenship that blends political involvement and national sentiment, because citizenship is systematically attached to its structure,the nation-state, where identity-based and political aspects are blurred. But at the same time the empirical reality of citizenship implies a conceptual and interpretativepolyvalence. Whether citizenship is political, judicial, social, or economic and its content identity-based, cultural, or juridical, this combination boils down to a sense of loyalty directed at once toward the group, the community, civil society, and the state. It is through their interpenetrationthat the actors' strategies emerge. Thus citizenship in practice and as discourse is linked to the phenomenon of exclusion, to ways to counter social exclusion and to foster political inclusion. On the other hand, citizenship as civic participation does not always theoretically preclude the expression of collective identities. All the more so since migrants who arrived in different European countries in the 1960s and their descendants publicly express their attachments to the country

of origin, a linguistic, ethnic, or religious community, or a local community, as well as to a transnationalcommunity and the European Union. Their participation combines both the interests of an ethno-religious or cultural community and the political community. The principle of new ethnic identifications defined in religious or national terms from local to transnationalbecomes one of the stakes of citizenship open to negotiation. Such an evolution brings to the fore a multiplicity of allegiances that all plural democratic societies face. These have crystallized around debates on dual citizenship, mainly in Germany. For the group, dual citizenship is founded on a logic that has two consequences: it transformsnationality into an identity rooted in the country of origin and it makes of citizenship an entitlement within the country of residence: identity vs. rights. On such a view, citizenship becomes simply a legal status, and nationality is merely defined along the religious, ethnic, or cultural lines that constitute the identity of the home country. In Germany, for example, by demanding dual citizenship, Turks define citizenship as a judicial tool that gives them political representation and nationality as an ethnic identity. Dual citizenship flows therefore from a duality that appears, a priori, contradictory but is in fact complementary: the construction of a minority status and the creation of a citizen's identity. Both emerge within the country of residence's institutions. How, then, can the relationship between citizenship and nationhood be defined? A citizenship linked to the nation of the home country thereby de-territorialized,or a citizenship related to an ethnic community seeking recognition not only within the national political community but on a European and international level, therefore de-nationalized and de-territorialized?Such a question suggests that ethnic communities become "transnational nations" derived from the interaction between home and host countries and with a broader space of transnationalparticipation.

Citizenship, Transnationalism, and Territoriality

Dual citizenship relates defacto to transnationalism. The increasing fluidity of borders has led immigrants to develop transnationalnetworks linking the country of origin to the country of residence and to participate actively in both spaces. In this perspective dual citizenship stems from political participation in both political communities, which brings to light multiple membership and to some extent multiple loyalties: to the home country, to the country of residence, and to the transnationalcommunity itself. Dual citizenship becomes the institutional expression of and the basis for transnationalism. Transnationalismis important in relation to European integration. Citizens and residents participate in the European Union's politics through transnationalnetworks combining identity-be it national, religious, or both-and interest. This is also due to the very nature of the European Union, where the idea of supranationality has given shape to a transnationalcivil society within which networks of solidarity (national, regional, religious, or professional) compete, interact, and cover the European space. The politicization of each of these networks has led to the formation of transnational,de-nationalized public space. In this space, thanks to the density of communications between actors from different traditions, transnationalcommunities can socialize politically and the same actors can learn the trade of a new political culture that takes shape outside the nations and their institutions, creating a new political identification that is de-nationalized and transnational.The identity of a transnationalcitizenship is expressed through the fight of transnationalactors for equality and human rights, seeking at the same time a unified identity in search of legitimacy before supranationalinstitutions. Paradoxically, a unified identity for a transnationalcommunity leads to a particu-

694

PS October 2005

nation": laritythatbecomesthe basis for buildinga "transnational non-territorial andits nationalism translates the transnationalization of communitarian feelings. Transnationalism andEuroperaisethe questionof withregard to participation andcitizenship.4 First territoriality for of all, transnational create a organizations space political thatgoes beyondnational territories. Theyre-map participation a "political thatis Europe,albeittransnational and community" therefore de-territorialized Fromthis and/or re-territorialized. becomesa broader, unbounded territory space,where perspective, institutions andwhere nation-states andsupranational interact, societies transnational networks buildbridgesbetweennational andEurope(Kastoryano it implies,in 2004). As for citizenship, a the view of the activistsinvolvedin buildingsuch a network, in the construction of a new "community role of responsibility thatis supposed to represent the European Unionand of faith"5 is expressed Justas it was at the by the "willto live together."6 of a national this impliesthe formation politicalcommunity, of theirwill to live together on a defacto multicultural expression residents withlegal status)anddemocratic (including space [1998] 2005; 2002b). (Kastoryano The questionof European has led to the elaboration citizenship of conceptssuchas postnational, and/or cosmopolitan transnational andconstitutional all membership, patriotism, of in that came with the Maastricht 1992. along concepts Treaty In legal terms,the Theseconceptsremain, normative. however, of the Union." Treatydefinedthe statusof "citizenship According to Article8 of the Treaty, a "citizenof the Union"is whoever holdsthe nationality of one of the memberstates.In principle, of the Unionrequires the national citizenship citizenshipof one of the memberstates.Thusthe Treaty maintains the linkbetween as is the case in nation-states. But the citizenshipandnationality of the Unionbringsan extra-territorial practiceof citizenship to nation-states: aspectintoplay withregard againArticle8 (8a-8d) of the Treatygives the citizenof the Union,the rightto of a memberstateas move,reside,andworkfreelyin the territory well as the rightto vote andrunfor office in local electionsandin electionsbasedon residency(i.e., in the European Parliamentary of a memberstateof whichhe or she is not a citizen,but territory The extra-territoriality of the conceptof citizenship just resident). is expressed its that is, politicalparticipation by practice, beyond limitednation-states, therefore the territorially de-territorializing nationalcommunity the European or re-territorializing space.As Preuss(1998) has pointedout, territoriality becomesthe basic meansof the citizenship of the Union. is preciselywhatgives transnationalism Extra-territoriality its strength. Like dualcitizenship, it institutionalizes multiple fromnationhood and allegiancesanddissociatescitizenship Withinthe European Unionthis multiplicity of territoriality. includethe allegiancesandspacesfor politicalparticipation home country in the repertoire of citizenship. In fact, European as a moreglobalconceptof membership than citizenship, introduces the allegianceof immigrants to their nation-states, homecountry into the bargaining processin the sameway that theyexpresstheirallegianceto theirstateof residenceand to the transnational in whichthey areinvolved. community The countries of originparticipate in buildinga transnational andencourage extra-territorial For community citizenship. like Turkey, in relation Morocco,andPakistan, example,countries to their6migrds settledin Europe, havechangedtheircitizenship dualcitizenship in theirconstitutions in order laws, introducing to maintain their emigrant loyaltyby inducingthemto maintain Eventhoughsuchprocessescan be sources originalcitizenship. of tensionbetweenhomeandhost countries for countries that the homecountry contributes rejectdualcitizenship, openlyto the construction of a "diaspora" to the design and,contributes PSOnline www.apsanet.org

a "diasporic of its thatis expressed by the attachment identity" Suchextra-tercitizens-former or current-to the homeland. is at the core of transnationalism. It keepsthe legalityof ritoriality the citizenshipof the country of origin,butonly on its territory; its de-territorialization for identityand abroad becomesa resource mobilization for individuals descent. and/orgroupsof immigrant Withinthis perspective thenationis linkedto the citizenryof the home country. At stakeis the integration of the state(bothstates)into a global 8). Takethe case of Turkey, space(Ong 1999, specificallyChapter for example.FourmillionTurkshavesettledin different Eurocountries to form a new called "Turks abroad" by pean category authorities andthe media.The Turkish the Turkish government the attachment aimsto maintain of the 6migrds to national ideoloofficial rhetoric on andat Kemalism, gies-secular, expressed by the samereligious--by insuringa permanent to what allegiance Islam"by national officialcirclesas well as is called"moderate to Islamismdevelopedin the international mediaas a reaction national immigration. Turkey's goal is to maintain citizenship valuesabroad; it is a way of sustaining the linkbetweencitizenIn otherwords,external to ship andnation,butextra-territorially. the nation,external to the territory, butyet a citizen.In thiscase, at stakeis Turkey's Union.Sucha "de-terplacein the European stateconstitutes ritorialized" belongingnourished by the Turkish a resource for negotiations. Forcountries at stakeis of settlement, the inclusionof transnational comactivitiesinto the national of nationhood. munityandthe "re-territorialization" Generally transnational nationalism andentertained speaking, supported by stateshas becomean inevitable issue in international relations.

Couldtransnationalism give shapeto a new formof nationalism thatdiffersfromthe highlyterritorialized of the nationalisms 19thand20thcenturies? Transnational communities areconstructed around shared references andbringto the fore a feeling of belongingto a "deterritorialized nation" withidentityclaims thatarenourished new of nationalism. by Together, expressions of the linkbetweenterritory, nation, theylead to a redefinition andpoliticalspace,challenging the nation-state as well as a terpoliticalstructure. ritorially-defined But transnationalism andan extra-territorial citizenship generate negotiations betweentransnational actorsandstates.For transnational actionbecomesa political actors,a transnational tool leadingthemto act from"outside." Forstates,transnationalism is a way to includeidentityissues developedin a minority situationintotheirpoliticalstrategy and"re-territorialize" themor themselvesact as "de-territorialized" actorsin orderto maintain the loyaltyof transnational actorsandof anynationalist expression beyondtheirpoliticalborder. It becomesfor statesa way to into the processof globalization. integrate Thusthe paradox: Evenif transnational logic andits expression of nationalism national tryto circumvent politicsandweakenthe state,the stateremainsthe drivingforceof the processof globalization.Despiteits limitedautonomy due to normative pressures of supranational institutions, despitean increasing interdependencebetweenthe internal andexternal in politicaldecisions,the stateremainsthe mainactorfor negotiations defendingits interest andits sovereignty withinandoutsideof its borders. It remains the legal sourcefor citizenshipdespitedualcitizenship. But transnational communities andtheir"nationalization" havebecomean sourceof identification, andmobilization, resistance, important a sourceof powerstemming fromthe mobilityof individuals andgroupsin oppositionto the immobility of states.Therefore, couldn'tthe de-territorialization of citizenship new tengenerate sions betweenstatesandcommunities new and,moregenerally, tensionsin the international system?

695

Notes
1. Citizenshipas a subjectivefeeling of membershipand citizenshipas engagement.See, Leca (1986). 2. Though Germanyhas appliedthe principleof jus solis for childrenborn on Germanterritorysince 2000-if the parentshave been official residents for the last eight years-it is too soon to predictits political impact.Likewise, has been made easier, and the number even thoughthe process naturalization of naturalized foreignersincreased,it is still soon to measuretheirpolitical and electorateimpact. 3. Habermasmakes the typology between "passivecitizenship"and "active citizenship."The formerfinds its legitimacy in the developmentof the welfare state and does not include participation in the political community.The latter requiresan "activecitizenship,"in J. Habermas(1995). 4. See the Introduction of M. Berezin, in M. Berezin and M. Schain (2004). 5. In referenceto Otto Bauer. 6. Inspiredby E. Renan'sfamous phrase"Qu'est-cequ'une nation?""What is a nation?"

References
Berezin, M., and M. Schain, eds. 2004. EuropewithoutBorders:Remapping Territory, Citizenship,and Identityin a Transnational Age. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins UniversityPress. W. R. 1992. Citizenshipand Nationhoodin France and Germany. Brubaker, UniversityPress. Cambridge,MA: Harvard Dagger,R. 1997. Civic Virtues:Citizenshipand RepublicanLiberalism.New York:Oxford UniversityPress. et retour.Paris: Dumont, L. 1991. L'iddologieallemande: France-Allemagne Ed. Gallimard. Habermas,J. 1995. "Citizenshipand National Identity:Some Reflectionson In TheorizingCitizenship,ed. R. Beiner.Albany: the Futureof Europe." State Universityof New York,255-283. pour l'Europe?Le multiKastoryano,Riva, ed. [1998] 2005. Quelle identitd culturalismea l'dpreuve,2nd edition. Paris:Presses de Sciences-po. The Place Networks and Political Participation: 2004. "Transnational of Immigrantsin the EuropeanUnion."In EuropewithoutBorders:ReAge, eds. Citizenship,and Identityin a Transnational mapping Territory, M. Berezin and M. Schain. Baltimore:Johns HopkinsUniversityPress, 64-89. 2002. NegotiatingIdentities:States and Immigrantsin France and Germany.Princeton:PrincetonUniversityPress. In Critical Viewsof 2002b. "TheReach of Transnationalism." September11: Analysesfrom aroundthe World,eds. Eric Hershbergand Kevin Moore. New York:Free Press, 209-224. Political Philosophy.New York:Oxford Kymlicka,W. 2002. Contemporary UniversityPress. of the Citizen: A Survey on Kymlicka,W., and W. Norman. 1994. "Return Ethics (January): 352-381. Recent Workon CitizenshipTheory." et citoyennetedans l'Europedes immigraLeca, Jean. 1992. "Nationalit6 tions."In Logiquesd'Etat et immigrationen Europe,eds. J Costa-Lascoux and P. Weil. Paris:Kim&. et citoyennete."In Sur l'individualisme, Leca, Jean. 1986. "Individualisme eds. PierreBirnbaumand JeanLeca. Paris:Presses de la FNSP, 159-213. Ong, Aihwa. 1999. Flexible Citizenship:The CulturalLogics of Transnationality. Durham,NC: Duke UniversityPress. Preuss,Ulrich K. 1998. "Citizenshipin the EuropeanUnion."In Re-imagineds. D. Archibugi,D. Held, and M. K6hler. ing the Political Community, Stanford:StanfordUniversityPress, 138-151.

696

PS October 2005