Sei sulla pagina 1di 5
Citizenship, Nationhood, and Non-Territoriality: Transnational Participation in Europe Author(s): Riva Kastoryano Source:

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:

Accessed: 05/06/2009 21:43

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at 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

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 organization founded in 1995 to build trusted digital archives for scholarship. We work with the scholarly community to preserve their work and the materials they rely upon, and to build a common research platform that promotes the discovery and use of these resources. For more information about JSTOR, please contact

information about JSTOR, please contact American Political Science Association is collaborating

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


Nationhood, and



Transnational Participation




Sincethe 1980s, the

question of citizenship

hastakenrootas a major themein thesocial


social, andculturaldebatesin all democraticso-


shapes anddefinitionsin its



poration intonation-statesandtheir expansion


relating to homeandhost country to includea broad Europeanspace.Citizenship is also an issuefor European constructionitself.Within

expressed in

differentdomains extending fromthenational

community to thecivil

only "legal"citizenship allowsthefull partici-

pation of individualsand groups in the


thetransnational participation of

encouragedby the very natureof the European

Unionandits supranational institutionsandde

thefocusof juridical,political,

Europe,citizenship hastakendifferent

practice with regard to immigrants' incor-

politicalparticipationbeyond boundaries

nation-states citizenship hasbeen

society, even though


community. At the Europeanlevel,despite


facto expansion of dual citizenship, theclaim for

equalrecognition as citizensthatunderlies


of immigrants remains

withintheframework of the legitimacy of the citizenship.

struggle for equality extendedto different



Kastory rano,




stateof residenceand

The question of citizenship therefore opens

the way to negotiations of identitiesbetween

statesand immigrants(Kastoryano2002).


that citizenship entailsis

domains, often turningnegotiations of interest


question of negotiating themeansof inclusion

of immigrants intothe politicalcommunity

on thebasisof a new

community structuresandnationalinstitutions.


of equality anda way


becomesa way to claim recognition as a "citi-

zen,"through whichtheattachmentand

to botha nationalandanethnic community

are expressed,therebycombining a


understandingof citizenship raisesthe question of therelevanceof the triple linkbetween citizenship,nationality,andidentity,hencethe linkbetween politicalcommunity andcultural community,theformeras a sourceof rightsand legitimacy,andthelatteras a sourceof identity.

negotiations of identity. For states, it is a

equilibrium between

individuals,citizenship becomesa principle






At the Europeanlevel,theconstructionof a new politicalspace createsan opportunity foraction beyondboundaries,leading to transnational


negotiations withstates-home andhost-and


regard to the practice of citizenship andits relationto nationhood.

representation andto new

question of territoriality with


article explores these complex


articulationsof belonging andtheactions


analyzes thelinkbetweenculturaland political

belonging, between rights and identity andthe

relevanceof territoriality in relationto nation

andnew expressions of nationalismraised by formsof transnational participation.

question of citizenship and

Citizenship, Nationality, and Identity


concepts of citizenship and nationality,


(Leca1992)concepts withintheframework

of a nation-state, aredefinedaboveall

membership in a politicalcommunity. This membership takes shapethroughrights and

dutiesthatareembodied in the

citizenship. Its implementationby law implies

veryconcept of


interdependent and "interchangeable"


integration orthe incorporation of the

"foreigner" intothenational community with

whichhe or sheis supposed to sharethesame

moraland political values. Moreover, she orhe

is supposed to adopt orevento "appropriate"

historicalreferencesas a proof of belonging

and loyalty to the

nation, which

community bornof modernity. Debateson citizenship andnationhoodreveal

precisely such

interpretation and juridicalshape is given to

citizenship. Basedon

Germany,citizenship andnationhoodhave analyzed in ideal-typical terms opposing a

culturalandethnic understanding of thenation



expectations, whateverhistorical

foundingprinciples of the

according to Weberis the only

the example of France

to a civic and

Dumont 1991). The

political one (Brubaker1992;

reality,however, is more

complex.Obviously such representations of thenationhave explained, andto someextent justified,policies andlawsof citizenship in democraticstates.But lately, the experience of immigrationandsettlement alongwiththe claimfor recognitionof cultural particularities and equalcitizenshiphave changed the understandingof citizenship,andcarriedits practicebeyondits legaldefinition. A normativeversionof citizenshipembodies



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 towardthe 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


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 participationwhereby 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

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 structurestranslatesinto 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

process that takes into consideration the length of their stay, their

contributionto 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

lican 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 towardthe group, the community, civil society, and the state. It is through their interpenetration that 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 arrivedin different European countries in the 1960s and their descendants publicly express their attachmentsto the country

devise different strategies for political participation. In

of their country of origin, prompting activists

the process of naturalization, a

of repub-


of origin, a linguistic, ethnic, or religious community, or a local

community, as well as to a transnational community and

pean Union. Their participation combines both the interests of an ethno-religious or cultural community and the political communi- ty. 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 allegianc- es that all plural democratic societies face. These have crystal- lized arounddebates on dual citizenship, mainly in Germany. For

the group, dual citizenship is founded on a logic that has two con- sequences: it transforms nationality 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, citi- zenship 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, Turksdefine citizenship as a judicial

tool that gives them political representation and

ethnic identity. Dual citizenship flows therefore from a duality

that appears, a priori, contradictory but is in

the construction of a minority status and the creation of a citizen's

identity. Both emerge within the country of residence's institu- tions. 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 interactionbetween home and host countries and with a broader space of transnational participation.

the Euro-

nationality as an

fact complementary:

Citizenship, Transnationalism, and Territoriality

Dual citizenship relates defacto to transnationalism.The increasing fluidity of bordershas led immigrants to develop transnationalnetworks linking the country of origin to the country

of residence and to participateactively in both spaces. In this per-


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 transnational community itself.


basis for transnationalism. Transnationalismis important in relation to European integra- tion. 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 natureof the EuropeanUnion, where the idea of suprana- tionality 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 forma- tion of transnational,de-nationalized public space. In this space, thanks to the density of communications between actors from different traditions,transnationalcommunities can socialize po- litically and the same actors can learn the tradeof 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 transnational citizenship is ex- pressed through the fight of transnationalactors for equality and human rights, seeking at the same time a unified identity in search

of legitimacy before supranational institutions. Paradoxically, a unified identity for a transnational community leads to a particu-

dual citizenship stems from political participation in


citizenship becomes the institutional expression of and the

PS October 2005

larity thatbecomesthebasisfor

non-territorialandits nationalismtranslatesthetransnationaliza-

tionof communitarian feelings. Transnationalismand Europe raisethe question of

territoriality with regard to participation and citizenship.4 First

of all, transnational organizations createa space for political

participation that goes

a "politicalcommunity" thatis Europe, albeittransnationaland


perspective,territory becomesa broader, unbounded space,

nation-statesand supranational institutions interact, andwhere

transnationalnetworksbuild bridges betweennationalsocieties

and Europe(Kastoryano2004). As for

theview of theactivistsinvolvedin

roleof responsibility in theconstructionof a new

of faith"5thatis supposed to represent the European Unionand

is expressedby the"willto live together."6 Justas it wasatthe

formationof a national politicalcommunity, this implies the

expression of theirwill to live

(including residentswith legalstatus) anddemocratic space (Kastoryano[1998]2005;2002b). The question of Europeancitizenship hasled to theelaboration

building a "transnational nation":

beyond nationalterritories. Theyre-map


citizenship, it implies, in

building sucha network, a


together on a de facto


of concepts suchas postnational,cosmopolitan and/or

transnational membership, andconstitutional patriotism, all

concepts thatcame along


Treaty definedthestatusof

to Article8 of the Treaty, a "citizenof theUnion"is whoever

holdsthe nationality of one of thememberstates.In

citizenship of theUnion requires thenational citizenship of one of thememberstates.Thusthe Treaty maintainsthelinkbetween

citizenship and nationality as is thecasein nation-states.Butthe

practice of citizenship of

aspect into play with regard to nation-states: again Article8

(8a-8d) of the Treatygives

move,reside, andwork freely

in the territory of a memberstateas

well as the right to voteandrunforofficein localelectionsandin

EuropeanParliamentary electionsbasedon residency(i.e.,

territory of a memberstateof whichhe or sheis nota citizen, but

justresident). The extra-territoriality of the concept of citizenship

withthe Treaty of Maastrichtin 1992.

theUnion." According


theUnion brings anextra-territorial

thecitizenof the Union, the right to

in the

conceptsremain,however, normative.In legalterms, the

"citizenship of


territorially limited nation-states, therefore de-territorializing the


Preuss (1998) has pointedout,territoriality becomesthebasic

meansof the citizenship of theUnion.


allegiances anddissociates citizenship fromnationhoodand

territoriality. Withinthe

allegiances and spaces for politicalparticipation includethe home country in the repertoireof citizenship.Infact,European citizenship,as a moreglobalconceptof membership than

nation-states,introducestheallegianceof immigrants to their

homecountryintothe bargainingprocess in

theyexpresstheirallegianceto theirstateof residenceand to thetransnationalcommunityin which they areinvolved.

Thecountriesof originparticipate in buildinga transnational

communityandencourageextra-territorial citizenship. For

example,countrieslike Turkey,Morocco,andPakistan,in relation

to their 6migrds settledin Europe, have changed their citizenship

laws,introducingdual citizenship in theirconstitutionsin order

to maintainemigrantloyaltyby

originalcitizenship. Even though such processes canbe sources of tensionbetweenhomeandhostcountriesforcountriesthat

reject dual citizenship, thehome country contributes openly to

theconstructionof a "diaspora"and, contributesto the design



practice, that is, politicalparticipationbeyond

the Europeanspace.


institutionalizes multiple

European Unionthis multiplicity of

national community or re-territorializing


is precisely what gives

strength. Likedual citizenship, it


inducingthemto maintaintheir


a "diasporicidentity" thatis expressedby

citizens-former orcurrent-to thehomeland.Suchextra-ter-

ritoriality is atthecoreof transnationalism.It keeps the legality of

the citizenship of the country of origin, but only onits territory;

identity and

mobilizationforindividualsand/or groups of immigrant descent.

its de-territorializationabroadbecomesa resourcefor

theattachmentof its

Withinthis perspective thenationis linkedto the


citizenry of the


At stakeis

the integration of the state (bothstates) intoa global

space(Ong 1999,specificallyChapter8). Takethecaseof Turkey,

for example. FourmillionTurkshavesettledin differentEuro-


theTurkishauthoritiesandthemedia.TheTurkish government aimsto maintaintheattachmentof the 6migrds to nationalideolo-

gies-secular, expressedby officialrhetoricon Kemalism, andat

the same

is called"moderateIslam" by nationalofficialcirclesas well as

theinternationalmediaas a reactionto Islamism developed in



ship and nation, but extra-territorially. Inother words, externalto

the nation, externalto the

at stakeis Turkey'splace


a resourcefor negotiations. Forcountriesof settlement, at stakeis

theinclusionof transnationalactivitiesintothenationalcom- munity andthe"re-territorialization"of nationhood. Generally speaking, transnationalnationalism supported andentertained by stateshasbecomeaninevitableissuein internationalrelations.

ritorialized"belonging nourished by

in the European Union.Sucha "de-ter-

countriesto forma new category called"Turksabroad" by

religious--byinsuring a permanentallegiance to what

abroad; it is a way

is to maintainnational citizenship

of sustaining thelinkbetweencitizen-

territory, but yet

a citizen.Inthis case,

Couldtransnationalism give shape to a newformof national-

territorializednationalismsof the

ism thatdiffersfromthe highly


structedaroundsharedreferencesand bring to theforea

of belonging to a "deterritorializednation"with

thatarenourished by new expressions of nationalism. Together,


and politicalspace,challenging thenation-stateas well

ritorially-definedpolitical structure. Buttransnationalismandanextra-territorial citizenshipgener-

ate negotiations betweentransnationalactorsandstates.For

transnational actors, a transnationalactionbecomesa political

tool leading themto actfrom"outside."For states,transnational-

ism is a

situationintotheir politicalstrategy and"re-territorialize"themor

themselvesactas "de-territorialized"actorsin orderto maintain


sion beyond their political border.Itbecomesforstatesa

integrate intothe process of globalization.


identity claims

leadto a redefinitionof

thelinkbetween territory,nation,

as a ter-


to include identity issues

developed in a minority

loyalty of transnationalactorsandof any nationalist expres-

way to

Thusthe paradox: Evenif transnational logic andits expression

of nationalism try to circumventnational politics andweakenthe

state, thestateremainsthe driving forceof the process of global-

ization. Despite its limited autonomy dueto normative pressures


politicaldecisions, the

stateremainsthemainactorfor negotiationsdefending its

andits sovereignty withinandoutsideof its borders.Itremains

the legal sourcefor


important sourceof identification,resistance, and mobilization,

a sourceof

and groups in opposition to


sionsbetweenstatesandcommunities and, more generally, new

tensionsin theinternational system?

supranationalinstitutions,despite an increasinginterdepen-



citizenshipdespite dual citizenship. Buttrans-

mobility of individuals

powerstemming fromthe


immobility of states. Therefore,

citizenshipgenerate newten-



1. Citizenship as a subjectivefeeling of membership and citizenship as

engagement.See, Leca (1986).

2. ThoughGermany has applied the principle of jus solis for childrenborn

on German territory since 2000-if

for the last eight years-it

even though the process naturalizationhas been made easier, andthe number of naturalized foreigners increased, it is still soon to measuretheir political

andelectorate impact.

the parents havebeen official residents

is too soon to predict its politicalimpact.Likewise,


Berezin,M., andM. Schain, eds. 2004. Europe withoutBorders: Remapping Territory,Citizenship, and Identity in a Transnational Age. Baltimore:

Johns HopkinsUniversity Press. Brubaker, W. R. 1992. Citizenship and Nationhoodin Franceand Germany.

Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Dagger, R. 1997. Civic Virtues: Citizenship and Republican Liberalism.New York:Oxford University Press. Dumont, L. 1991. L'iddologie allemande: France-Allemagne et retour. Paris:

Ed. Gallimard. Habermas, J. 1995. "Citizenship andNational Identity: Some Reflectionson the Futureof Europe." In TheorizingCitizenship, ed. R. Beiner. Albany:

State University of New York,255-283.

Kastoryano,Riva, ed. [1998] 2005. Quelle


pour l'Europe? Le multi-


l'dpreuve, 2nd edition. Paris:Pressesde Sciences-po.

- 2004. "TransnationalNetworksandPolitical Participation: The Place of Immigrants in the European Union."In Europe withoutBorders:Re-

mappingTerritory,Citizenship, and Identity in a Transnational Age, eds.

M. Berezin andM. Schain.Baltimore:Johns HopkinsUniversityPress,



3. Habermasmakesthe typology between "passivecitizenship" and"active

citizenship." The formerfindsits legitimacy in the development of the welfare stateanddoes not include participation in the politicalcommunity. The latter requires an "active citizenship," in J. Habermas (1995).

4. See the Introductionof M. Berezin, in M. Berezin andM. Schain (2004).

5. In referenceto OttoBauer.

6. Inspiredby E. Renan'sfamous phrase"Qu'est-cequ'une nation?""What

is a nation?"

- 2002. Negotiating Identities:Statesand Immigrants in Franceand Germany. Princeton:Princeton University Press.

- 2002b. "TheReachof Transnationalism."In CriticalViews of September 11: Analysesfrom aroundthe World, eds. Eric Hershberg and KevinMoore.New York:Free Press, 209-224.

Kymlicka, W. 2002. Contemporary Political Philosophy. New York:Oxford Press.


Recent Workon CitizenshipTheory." Ethics (January): 352-381. Leca, Jean. 1992. "Nationalit6 et citoyennete dans l'Europe des immigra- tions."In Logiques d'Etatet immigration en Europe, eds. J Costa-Lascoux andP.Weil. Paris:Kim&. Leca, Jean. 1986. "Individualismeet citoyennete." In Sur l'individualisme, eds. PierreBirnbaumandJeanLeca. Paris:Pressesde la FNSP, 159-213. Ong, Aihwa. 1999. Flexible Citizenship: TheCultural Logics of Transnation-

ality. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Preuss, UlrichK. 1998. "Citizenship in the European Union."In Re-imagin- ing thePolitical Community, eds. D. Archibugi, D. Held, and M. K6hler. Stanford:Stanford University Press, 138-151.


andW.Norman.1994. "Returnof the Citizen:A Survey on

PS October 2005