The Dangers of Dual Citizenship

The Dangers of Dual Citizenship
By Sam Onimisi

By reason of failure of governance, it is becoming difficult to understand the meaning and values of citizenship. But who is a citizen and what is citizenship? Why not leave the definition till later, and let us explore backward with some illustrations? On 6th and 21st July 2005 – both days being Thursday, the British capital London had a sour taste of terror attacks by suicide bombers, which left death, injuries and destruction on their trails. Security agents had thought that some Osama Bin Laden’s disciples must have gained entry into the UK with forged passports to perpetrate the mayhem. But it was not so. It was discovered that the suicide bombers were citizens of Britain but of Arab descent, born, bred and resident in the U.K
Now the British policy on citizenship is that wherever your parents came from on planet earth, so long as they are residents of Britain, and if during that period you were born there, then you are an automatic British citizen with the same legal rights like the English, Irish, Scot or Welsh man. It is this policy which made thousands of Africans, Arabs and Asians citizens of the United Kingdom. There has been many other terror acts by Arabian descendants of British citizenship. Lets examine some other instances.
On November 5, 2009, an American army officer and psychiatrist shot dead 13 soldier/colleagues at Fort Hood, Texas U.S.A Major Nidal Malik Hassan was an American by residence and orientation of Arab descent and was said to have had contacts or connection with Yemen’s radical Muslim cleric, Anwar al-Awlaki.
Again, British police on 29 December 2010 charged nine men with conspiracy to cause explosions in what they described as an extensive terror plot against U.K targets. Who are these men? The West Midland Police identified them as Gurukanth Desai, Omar Sharif Latif, Abdul Malik Miah, Mohammed Moksudur Rahman, Nazam Hussain, Usman Kham and Abul Bosher Mohammed Shahjahan – all residents and citizens of Britain but of Arabian, Indian, Pakistan and Iranian descents. Citizens plotting against their country?
Again, on 29 December 2010, five suspected Islamist militants were arrested for planning a gun attack at Copenhagen, an attempt described by the Danish Justice minister Lars Barfoed as “the most serious attempt at terror so far in Denmark.” The suspects? They are Swedish citizens of Tunisian, Lebanese and Iraqi descents – all Muslims.
Here is another instance. Anya Kushchenko, daughter of a Russian diplomat was born in the UK and had an automatic British citizenship. She got married in 2002 to a Briton, Alex Chapman and so became Anna Chapman. She had dual Russian-U.K nationality. She became a spy for Russian, her nation of descent and in the process was arrested in New York U.S where “… she did not seek to conceal her Russian identity….” She was among 10 Russians arrested in the U.S who admitted to being agents for a foreign country, and were exchanged for four U.S spies in a swap carried out in Vienna on 9 July 2010.
At home here in Nigeria, some Hausa-Fulani Islamic terrorists threw bombs in Jos Plateau State on Christmas Eve, killing scores of people with the excuse of fighting unbelievers on behalf of Allah and Muslims. On the same day, they attacked Christian worshippers in Maiduguri, Borno State, killing about eight people and burnt down some churches. This instances and illustrations call to question the meaning and value attached to citizenship. If a people will forever owe allegiance to their ethnic nation of ancestry and descent, what is the need for making them citizens of your country or town just because they are residents? Has these suicide bombers in the four countries sited above not enough proofs that citizen-by-residence or orientation is a fictitious creation which does not endure?
What the terrorists have proved is that most human beings cannot or do not forget their ancestry easily nor do they play with it. How could you disprove this if Britons, Danish, American, Russian and Nigerians of Arab descent or faith could destroy “their own countries or towns” in retaliation for what they perceived these countries had done against Arabian and Islamic interests? In what practical ways does the crisis in Iraq, Palestine, Afghanistan or Somalia affects the British-born, or American-born Arab suicide bombers, if not their ethnic feelings for their fellow Arab brethren? If the Hausa-Fulani Islamic terrorists of Jos, regards the town as their home by virtue of their Nigerian citizenship, would they plant bombs to kill their ‘brothers’ and destroy their ‘town’? Or when and how many bombs have been thrown in Kano, Sokoto or Gusau by the Berom, Tiv or Jukun in order to kill Hausa-Fulani and take over their land or rule over them?
In Nigeria, immigrants and nomads have assumed the status of MOBILE CITIZENSHIP and acquired indigenous rights to boot; whereas other Nigerian ethnic groups cannot enjoy the same right outside their ancestral lands. Is it not when such assumed rights clashes with the interest and the rights of their host communities that ethno-religious conflicts erupt? Where do the rights and interests of migratory-cum-nomadic ethnic group’s ends, and where does the rights and interests of sedentary ethnic groups begins? Need we not harmonize the rights of both so that Nigerian citizenship will stop spinning riots, mayhem and bomb blasts? The majority and minority tribes each have their ancestral lands or territory which is their natural inheritance. When did one territory grow to swallow the other up? Does land grows or expands, if not by war or conquest? Is the Jos crisis a war by Hausa-Fulani to conquer the land of the Berom, Afizere and Bassa of Plateau State? Until these questions are answered, there can be no light out of the tunnel.
One of the main causes of the Jos crisis is the proximity and porous borders Nigeria shares with Niger and Cameroon. For instance, the Cameroon has as many Fulani as there are in Nigeria, while the Hausa is the dominant ethnic group in neighbouring Niger Republic, a tribe which also is a major ethnic group in Nigeria. It is not disputable that most Fulani’s are nomads just as most Hausas are itinerant traders and farmers. Our porous borders facilitate entrances for millions of immigrants from those countries into Nigeria, without relevant papers and have been granted automatic citizenship status by their host tribesmen whose numerical strength is thus enhanced. Fallout of this situation is that the bloated population of Kano, Katsina, Sokoto etc has over-stretched social infrastructure and facilities in those states which made drifting to neighbouring states inevitable. Whenever these immigrants sought to enjoy dual citizenship, they infringe on the natural and legal rights of their hosts, thus a clash of culture and faith arises.
The second reason or cause of the crisis in Jos is economic. Livestock industry is a universal avocation. But the Fulani is more known as cattle rarer than others even though they practice theirs on nomadic basis. The topography of Plateau State is conducive to livestock farming. This is probably why the Vetenary Research Institute is sited in Vom, which has trained many Nigerians, especially the indigenous people of Plateau State the art and science of livestock farming. Today, many Plateau State indigenes are owners of large livestock farms with better and modern management skills and so, are in serious competition with nomadic Fulani cattle men. This has bred rivalry and often results in accusation of cattle rustling against one another. Not only this, nomadic cattle-men seem to take delight in marching their cows into cultivated farm lands of crop farmers, wrecking destruction of hard-earned foodstuffs with impunity-resulting in clashes of various proportions.
The third cause of the Plateau crisis is religious. Perhaps religion might rank as the immediate cause as the immigrants and nomadic or itinerant traders are almost all Muslims while the host community are almost all Christians. In a milieu of economic rivalry, clash of faith, values and culture, especially when immigrants asserts rights which are non-concomitant with and impinge on the legal or natural rights and freedom of the indigenous people, conflicts become inevitable. The contrast is that Hausa-Fulani are mostly Islamic monotheist, the native Plateau people are mostly Christians plus some polytheists. One is claiming universal right of faith, even seeking to impose their values and the others are resisting such impositions, thus the seemingly endless ethno-religious crisis.
The fourth cause of the conflict is political. Large immigrant settlers concentrated themselves on Jos North Local Council Area. With their large number, they believe the area should be conceded to them to field candidates. But the natives also believe in their own numerical strength and insist that all seats must be contested so that whoever emerges the winner wins. Each time election approaches, one side devices or instigates trouble to make election disputable or impossible. The State authorities often resort to appointing an administrator, and that sparks protests by the settler-community. One unique feature of this crisis is that it has always been the Hausa-Fulani settlers who protests. Other Nigerians hardly contest the election or participate in the protests.
It is an irony that while Nigeria ceded Bakassi to the Cameroon, the Fulani’s of Cameroon enjoys dual citizenship of both countries. As no citizen could give loyalty to two countries on equal basis, permanent allegiance goes to their ethnic nation and here is where Nigeria is cheated, minus the Hausa-Fulani. If citizenship by residence has proved to be fictitious and dangerous to stability, same cannot be said of citizenship by descent. If your parents are Urbogbo for example, you cannot by any stretch of imagination or audacity, become Hausa-Fulani, just because you were born and resident in Kano or Dutse! Never!!
Citizenship by descent or procreation is immutable, regardless of where you are born or domicile. The act of procreation or descent knows no boundary in the sense that you are who you are if you must be identified by the offspring of your parents. Your loyalty or allegiance and kin-feelings, must of necessity, go to your ancestry and not to the people or territory in which you are domicile. The Arabian-Britons and others as sited above have proved this point beyond doubt, just as the Hausa-Fulani bombers of Jos. Dual or mobile citizenship only helps to swindle others of their heritage. There is no place for dual indigeneity as the bombers have demonstrated. The real issues therefore are ethnic nationalism, religious freedom and political rights. Who else to blame? The fraudulent rickety geo-political structures and the decadent systems of government put in place by successive military dictatorship are to blame.
Any unit of government which has no coercive force under its control is a helpless federating unit. Any federating unit without a constitution of its own-making is fundamentally deficient as a tier of government. And none of the 36 States has either a police force or a constitution and so, they remain vassalage of the all powerful centre, and whoever controls the centre makes a slave of the so-called states. The crisis in Jos started during Joshua Dariye’s tenure Governor Jonah David Jang inherited it. Removing him by a state of emergency cannot be the solution. The Plateau people seem not willing to hand over their land or government to others who has their own land and government back home. Until we meet at a national conference to resolve our differences, no ethnic religious group will surrender their rights to another in peace.