Dual Citizenship - An expatriate perspective from the USA

Anjalika Silva

DUAL CITIZENSHIP: Lately, the Daily News has brought attention to the issue of dual citizenship and generated responses from proponents and opponents. One thing that is clear is that their views do not totally oppose the idea of dual citizenship but the dispute rests clearly on the fee that is levied and the callous attitude with which the applicants are treated in processing requests for dual citizenship.

This issue is not black or white to agree or disagree blindly. There are gray areas to consider-primarily, the value to the country and not as a reactionary measure to get back at expatriates. Sri Lankans live abroad for many reasons and blaming everyone for running away to a safe heaven is a simplistic generalisation without merit. The arbitrary fee is set with much venom and bitterness directed at expatriates.

Firstly, it is plainly evident that the Government and lawmakers have not studied the larger picture involved in the issue of dual citizenship to expatriates.

As Sri Lankans migrated to other lands over the last two to three generations, playing the blame game and looking at the demographic shift in one narrow direction is very unfortunate for the country. Expatriate numbers have increased exponentially with the first generation immigrants settling in lands that have become home for the second and third generations that never lived in Sri Lanka.

It is unfair to generalise that expatriate Sri Lankans who benefited from free education do not give back to the country implying that they are unpatriotic. In my experience, I have learned that among expatriates, one can count a large group that are exceedingly patriotic and are able to serve the needs of the country better by continuing to be expatriates.

The Sri Lankan style is to "hit back" and denigrate those who have done better. This trait among Sri Lankans has contributed largely as a catalyst in driving a large portion of the educated and goal oriented citizens out of the country.

It is not always greener on the other side. We as immigrants in other countries have sacrificed quality of life for an outwardly apparent higher standard of living that can be measured materially. However, even that does not come with ease. Unlike in Sri Lanka, productivity and accountability and not political connections or favoritism in any job at any level is what determines even the smallest measure of success in western countries.

It is plainly evident that the development in those countries results from the discipline and work ethic built into their infrastructure. Immigrants from Sri Lanka fall in line follow the rules and reap the success when opportunities are available.

It must be remembered that there is little or no job security in the developing world and the dynamics in those economies leave many people out of work even at the highest level of performance and education. On the contrary, job security in Sri Lanka is a given even under the worst of economic, political or other circumstances.

With all of the above demands on expatriates, many of us find time to devote to matters pertaining to Sri Lanka giving generously of our time and resources toward events, projects and service to the country and for promoting Sri Lanka as voluntary ambassadors overseas.

It is not fair to say that all expatriates have received free education and therefore they can afford to pay Rs.200,000 or US$ 2,000 for dual citizenship while continuing to willingly contribute in other invisible ways toward the country.

The fact to consider is that many expatriates contribute to the country in a positive way and although there may be a minority that don't do so, laws should not be framed to punish the inactive minority at the expense of the majority who serve their country even as residents offshore.

There are many second-generation children of expatriates who spent a greater part or all of their life overseas who have not received education or any other benefits from Sri Lanka. Some in this category are ever eager to learn about their roots in Sri Lanka and retain an identity as Sri Lankans hyphenated with the citizenship of birth in a foreign land.

This repulsive attitude toward expatriates does not help preserve ties with those who have become more educated and enlightened while living in developing nations. They bring a broader outlook to improve Sri Lanka and some effort should be made to retain that link rather than fend off those who are a part of "Sri Lankan Intellectual Wealth", a resource that is badly needed in the country.

It must be made known that in the US, if an individual can prove that at least one parent was a US citizen, a child of a citizen is recognised and has the right to citizenship privileges through a due process.

Although the Government has not studied the pros and cons, before pulling a figure out of a "hat" with no relevance to the real purpose of dual citizenship or the ramifications of stipulating heavy penalties on the expatriates, here are some salient facts that may be useful to consider in a much-needed review of this issue.

On average, an expatriate spends about US$ 1,000 per month per person while on vacation in Sri Lanka. However, the shortsighted 30-day visa prevents those who would like to stay longer from doing so.

The result is that they cross the shores to another country in the region that benefits from their spending in order to re-enter Sri Lanka to get another 30-day extension. Would it not be prudent for the Government to revisit the 30-day visa stipulation at least for foreign passport holders of Sri Lankan descent?

Even the US that has stringent visa regulations permits a 6-month stay for foreign passport holders whether or not it is used in some cases. If Sri Lanka follows with a change in the 30-day visa, the country will receive the benefit of the foreign currency spent by expatriates. Although it is not a direct payment for dual citizenship, ultimately it fills the country's coffers in some form, not once but every time they visit the country.

The other factor to consider is that expatriates who are from the baby boomer generation are not being viewed by the Government as a valuable asset both from their intellectual strength and from foreign currency revenue for the country through retirement pension remittances if they settle in Sri Lanka.

Providing them with special concessions to retire in Sri Lanka will bring foreign currency pensions and benefit to the healthcare system, some employment and other hidden benefits.

Instead of resentment against expatriates, inviting them to retire in Sri Lanka with tax concessions -- as offered to foreigners some years ago will be of benefit to the country. The private sector is building homes to attract returning expatriates.

However, without other concessions from the Government, this is not utilised to its full potential. The revenue from an incentive program will far exceed the revenue from the current shortsighted one time dual citizenship charge. Dual citizenship should be granted free to retirees as an incentive to return home.

Of course, even US$ pensioners will frankly admit that to pay $2,000 upfront is not within the financial strength of many first generation expatriates. The first generation of expatriates had to struggle in new countries with reduced opportunities and numerous hurdles to clear.

The children of first generation immigrants find it easier with education abroad and assimilation to alien cultures with far greater ease than new immigrants.

This is not a stretch of the truth. Retirement income even in the US reduces to approximately 60 per cent - 70 per cent of one's earnings if dependent on social security (state pension) alone. Although some adjustments for inflation are built in, it does not keep up with escalation of living expenses.

With rising costs, the retirement income reduces buying power particularly in the US. First generation immigrants who came to the US in their mid life did not have enough time and the opportunity to save large sums for investment in stocks or other retirement investments. Their first priority was and continues to be saving for education expenses for children.

Unlike in Sri Lanka, education and health are the two most costly services in the United States. A parent must budget for a modest estimation of anything between $10,000 to $20,000 US$ for college education per year per child. This amounts to tuition only. One cannot rely on grants and scholarships as they are highly competitive and the pool of funds is limited.

In addition, there are other needs of a college student that parents must meet. Some foreign students including Sri Lankans are more fortunate than children of the US taxpayers as they receive full scholarships and assistance with campus jobs.

In Sri Lanka, retiree benefits may be measured by standards set by the UN, World Bank and other international organisations from which many prominent Sri Lankans retire and return to Sri Lanka. There is a significant difference between benefits in International Organisations and benefits for others who have served in private corporations overseas.

In most cases, those who retire from International Organisations and become decision makers in Sri Lanka do not have a good understanding of the system other than their own. I have, on many occasions been surprised by the ignorance of those who are "secured in international organisations" assuming that the world outside offers the same terms.

This is furthest from the truth. On the other hand, the Government must consider that most Sri Lankans have taken alien citizenship by sheer need as they chose to settle in countries and seek employment that sometimes required security and background checks that come only with naturalisation. In the US there are certain professions that are not open to non-citizens even with green cards. Only citizenship is trusted.

After 9/11 even citizens are subject to intense scrutiny for obvious reasons. Isn't this the case in Sri Lanka too? Why then discriminate against your own? Of course, when funds have to be collected the fine lines of foreign citizenship disappear into oblivion and the resented expatriates become "Our Sri Lankans living abroad" as we have commonly seen in fundraising campaigns.

I can speak with authority on behalf of immigrants in the US having spent more years away from Sri Lanka than in Sri Lanka. I do not wish to be classed as a "run away" because family circumstances dictated this situation. However, I have been closely tuned into Sri Lankan immigrants and followed their progress at both ends of the scale and advocated the need for guidance and assistance to families starting from ground zero.

There are many like myself who have also devoted great amounts of energy for projects related to Sri Lanka supporting cultural programs, books for universities, limbs for disabled soldiers, sponsors for needy children, tsunami aid, raising funds for hospitals - the list can be quite lengthy. Embassies overseas are well aware of the service by expatriates if only they are used as a resource for formal monitoring such services.

Expatriates have no voice-they are only expected to traverse a one way street, open pocket books and give their hard-earned money to fundraisers. Expatriates are then called "traitors" directly or indirectly in different. Sri Lankans arriving in the US as new immigrants on the Diversity Lottery are not greeted with the welcome mat and high paying jobs.

Most of those families start struggling as two earner families. Although the US appears to have a high standard of living, the quality of life leaves much to be desired for the average worker struggling to survive in the first couple of years of life.

The less privileged immigrants do not have a forum. President Mahinda Rajapaksa should be highly commended for reminding the diplomatic missions that they need to offer assistance to the expatriate population (within reason of course) when needed. Expatriates view diplomatic staff as a privileged few but the President's new thinking has infused a positive effect on our missions overseas.

As an outcome of the circumstances viewed in real terms, stated below are a few suggestions for the government to consider

1. Reduce the dual nationality fee to a reasonable sum as before. If not Rs. 5000 when it began, make it Rs. 10,000 - a 100% increase.

2. Revisit the 30-day visa for Sri Lankans with foreign passports. On average, an individual spends $1,000 on personal expenses and family needs on a visit. Most of the time this cost is met with foreign currency brought into the country. Not everyone has houses rented in Colombo 7. with cash in the bank to spend. This is less than 1% of the expatriate population and should not be applied toward setting rates for all.

3. If the 30-day visa limit is increased to 90 days with provision to pay a reasonable amount for longer stays, more revenue will come into the country through expenditure incurred by expatriates.

4. Promote the participation of Sri Lankans in volunteer projects concerning Sri Lanka. Many who devote time and effort to work for their country while living overseas are never recognized or rewarded. Make it possible to obtain dual citizenship "free" in the case of those who have rendered service. The embassies can testify to the legitimacy of such applications. It will be an honour to receive such recognition. With only a piece of paper from the home country for services rendered to the country, Sri Lanka will gain a few happy expatriates who feel they are appreciated.

5. Provide incentives for Sri Lankans living overseas to make meaningful contributions. Provide some sort of identity that can be produced to immigration so that we receive at least a smile from the front line at the Katunayake airport. A little courtesy is not a lot to ask.

6. Offer extended visas free through Sri Lankan missions overseas for young people who wish to spend extended periods of time in Sri Lanka for studies or work experience. Currently they need to pay for visas even to offer volunteer service to the country for periods exceeding 30 days.

7. Review the potential to provide incentives to retire in Sri Lanka so that the country can gain from the intellectual wealth as well as the pension remittances.

It must be remembered that with every generation, we lose a proportion of our talent and resources in the way of valuable people when they move overseas. As an inevitable drift to lands with better opportunities, it is Sri Lanka's duty to find creative ways to keep them engaged in a dialogue with the country. If not, we will lose some of our greatest assets forever.

( The writer has lived in the US for over 22 years and served in numerous organizations for promoting Sri Lanka and as a past president of the Sri Lanka Association of Washington DC.)