The Third Gate: Naturalization Legislation in Central and Eastern
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
ABSTRACT Through citizenship laws, a state defines its population and identifies who belongs and who does not. This notion is intuitive, but how does a state decide who gets to be a member? Moreover, citizenship requirements vary dramatically around the globe. Thus, the central question of my study is this: why is it easier to become a citizen in some countries than in others? Because the current understanding of citizenship issues is based primarily on analyses of the established democracies of the West, I expand the scope of these studies by investigating these issues in the post-communist Central and Eastern Europe. Many of these states are newly independent, allowing me to capture issues of citizenship at a founding moment for emerging democracies. They are addressing questions of nationhood and constitution-building for the first time in decades. Once limited to places of transit migration, these states are now destinations for immigrants. Ethnic tensions, democratization, economic incentives, and newfound mobility are feeding migratory patterns. Yet these states are simply not accustomed to being terminuses for migration. Given their history and their present political and economic situations, they are poorly equipped to deal with these new demands. ii I construct an analytical framework that remedies the lack of theoretical agenda in previous works on citizenship policy and law. My framework is composed of two differing perspectives on the central dynamics of naturalization legislating, one focusing on domestic factors and the other on international ones. My analysis of these approaches is informed by normative understandings of what membership should look like in liberal democracies. My research combines cross-national analysis of data from 27 countries in Eastern and Central Europe with in-depth qualitative case studies of the Czech Republic and Slovakia. I single out these two countries for deeper research because they do not always follow the theoretical predictions. The multi-method approach I use enables me to first gain an understanding of the general patterns of the region before delving into an in-depth examination of particular cases. iii Dedicated to Bradley. iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I wish to thank my adviser, Goldie Shabad, for her support, encouragement, and critical eye. Her patience and belief in me made this dissertation possible, as did her endless help in correcting grant applications. I also thank Tony Mughan and Michael Neblo as committee members who both jumped in when needed and devoted considerable time into helping my drafts progress. Special thanks go to Clarissa Hayward, Kuba Zielinski, and Natalie Kistner for their early encouragement and thought-provoking discussions. Katja Michalak and Salomé Samii deserve particular praise for their tireless support and for listening to my ramblings as I thought things through. Salomé, in particular, was great at getting me “unstuck.” All of them were cheerleaders at a stage when I needed it most. I am thankful for the generous support of The Mershon Center, Ohio State University’s Office of International Affairs, The Graduate School, and The Department of Political Science. The funding I received from these sources enabled my research trips and provided me with time to write. I am grateful to Andrea Řezničková, Daša Majnušová, Donald Hempson, and Jürgen Landgraf in Prague. Each made my research easier by helping me make contacts and showing me the city, and Donald and Jürgen let me bounce my ideas off v them over delightful Czech beers. Lubomir Lanator in Bratislava performed these tasks equally well, and with tremendous graciousness. I also want to thank my parents, who instilled in me the importance of education and encouraged me to keep at it. Without their guidance, I may never have embarked on this journey. Finally, special thanks to Bradley. You urged me on, gave me encouragement, and occasionally cracked the whip. You made me believe I could not fail as long as I kept at it. You took care of “life” when I was too busy or too anxious to do so myself. From laundry to cooking to cleaning and more, you made sure things did not fall apart. Most of all, you helped me keep things in perspective. I am indebted to you. Thank you. vi VITA October 31, 1976………………………. Born – Cincinnati, Ohio 1994-1995………………………………Attended Sarah Lawrence College 1999……………………………………..B.A. Political Science, University of Cincinnati 2002……………………………………..M.A. Political Science, The Ohio State University 1999-2005……………………………… Graduate Teaching and Research Associate The Ohio State University 2005-2007…………………………….... Lecturer, The Ohio State University PUBLICATIONS 1. Shadley, Anna , “Support for Political Change: Is Self-Interest The Whole Story?” in Kazimierz Slomczynski, ed., Social Structure: Changes and Linkages. The Advanced Phase of the Post-Communist Transition in Poland (Warsaw: IFiS Publishers, 2002). FIELDS OF STUDY Major Field: Political Science vii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Abstract............................................................................................................................ii Dedication........................................................................................................................iv Acknowledgments ........................................................................................................... v Vita .................................................................................................................................vii List of Tables...................................................................................................................xi Chapters: 1. Introduction ......................................................................................................... 1 The Scope of the Study.............................................................................. 4 Research Design ........................................................................................ 8 Multi-method Approach................................................................... 8 Methodology ................................................................................... 10 Dependent Variable......................................................................... 11 Case Selection................................................................................. 12 Sources of Data............................................................................... 17 Overview of the Dissertation.................................................................... 20 2. Membership Rules and Liberal Coherence ....................................................... 22 Liberal Coherence is Irrelevant ............................................................... 27 Liberal Coherence is Possible ................................................................. 36 The Argument from Community................................................... 37 Liberal Nationalism....................................................................... 45 Liberal Egalitarianism ................................................................... 51 Conclusion: Liberal Coherence is Impossible......................................... 55 viii 3. Nationalism and Postnationalism in Naturalization Law ................................ 58 An Overview of the National and Postnational Theses........................ 60 The National Thesis............................................................................. 61 Political Explanations..................................................................... 62 Historical and Cultural Patterns...................................................... 72 Structure, Economics, and Demography ........................................ 78 The Postnational Thesis........................................................................ 84 International Institutions and Organizations .................................. 85 Sending States ................................................................................ 90 Conclusion: Nationalism or Postnationalism?...................................... 92 4. Naturalization Laws in Central and Eastern Europe ..................................... 95 The Setting: Central and Eastern Postcommunist Europe................... 96 Permissiveness and Restrictiveness in Naturalization Law................. 97 The National Thesis in Context.......................................................... 104 Political Explanations.................................................................. 104 Historical and Cultural Patterns................................................... 110 Demographic and Economic Approaches ................................... 123 The Postnational Thesis in Context.................................................... 133 International Institutions and Organizations ............................... 134 Discussion........................................................................................... 137 5. Naturalization Law in the Czech and Slovak Republics: Dual Histories, Dual Responses .......................................................................................................... 139 Migration Background........................................................................ 142 From Mass Exoduses… ............................................................. 142 … To Countries of Immigration................................................. 145 The Future of Immigration to the Region................................... 149 The Requirements