| Dual citizenship,or as it is also referred to,dual nationality is a legal status in which a person holds the citizenship of two different countries simultaneously,thus sharing the legal rights and obligations in both countries.Before 1960 s the majority of countries in the world upheld to a predominantly hostile stance towards the phenomenon of dual citizenship,that is,demanding renunciation of the original citizenship before being naturalized in any other states.However,since the past six decades there has been a substantial change in global approaches toward dual citizenship status.Nowadays,more three-quarters of countries throughout the world incorporate policies(into their citizenship legislations)which tolerate or even recognize acquisition of dual citizenship without the revocation of original one.The trend towards acceptance of dual citizenship status in Americas,Europe and Oceania has been proceeding faster as compared to African and Asian regions.The issue of dual citizenship in Central Asia has become relevant since the disintegration of the Soviet Union in 1991,when the five so-called “Stans” countries emerged as newly independent states.The approaches Central Asian states adhere toward dual citizenship status today vary greatly from absolute prohibition of the status to its complete embracement.Thus,the research questions I attempt to address in this study are: 1)Why some Central Asian states allow their citizens to possess dual citizenship(with Russia)while others do not? 2)What are the strong driving factors that motivate CA states to adhere to more permissive or restrictive policies towards dual citizenship?The study examines only three particular countries of the region,videlicet,Tajikistan,Turkmenistan,and Kyrgyzstan.And the reason behind it is that,unlike Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan(which are the largest countries in the region both in terms of population and Russian communities accordingly),the less populated republics of Tajikistan,Turkmenistan and Kyrgyzstan are the only countries in the region that to some extent adhere to permissive approach towards dual citizenship(with Russia).A comparative case study analysis is used to explain the divergence of dual citizenship policies of the targeted states.The theory of neo-classical realism is adopted to explain and analyze the issue of dual citizenship in Central Asian countries that has never been done before which gives a greater significance to the study.The results of the study,which concurred with the proposed main argument,shows that the adherence to liberal dual citizenship policies in Central Asian states is primarily determined by the economic factor.Specifically,as a result of a comparative analysis of the CA’ economies,an interesting pattern was revealed: the more a country is economically dependent(on Russia),the more liberal policy in relation to dual citizenship it adheres to.Therefore,the poorest and most remittent dependent republics of Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan currently incorporate the most liberal dual citizenship policies in the region.Meanwhile,the richest and least economically dependent(on Russia)country,Turkmenistan,is the most restrictive in terms of dual citizenship acceptance among the three states examined.This research study is comprised of five chapters.Chapter one covers the introductory part that contains the background of the study as well as methodological and theoretical approaches applied to testify the research questions and main argument of the study.This chapter also clarifies the significance of conducting this study which is filling the existing gap in the growing literature related to dual citizenship by conducting a theory based study of dual citizenship status in the Central Asian states.Chapter two examines the origins of the status of dual citizenship in Central Asia and identifies the core interests that drive Russia to accept dual citizenship with the Central Asian states.The study shows that during the Soviet rule,the population of all constituent republics,including those of Central Asia held single Soviet passport and was referred as “Soviet people”(Sovetskiy narod),regardless of ethnicity.However,the situation has drastically changed with the demise of the USSR in 1991 and with the emergence of five newly independent CA republics of Kazakhstan,Uzbekistan,Turkmenistan,Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan,which made the status of dual citizenship relevant in the region.The dissolution of the Soviet Union resulted in tens of millions of Russians and other “titular nationals” finding themselves as outlanders in the new founded states formerly being part of USSR.Aiming to address such a phenomenon,liberal citizenship policies were adopted by the Russian Federation as well some other former Soviet Republics,including the Central Asian states.New citizenship laws introduced “zero option” principle for newly emerged states “granting the opportunity for new citizenship to all people who lived in the new state at the time of dissolution.”Turkmenistan and Tajikistan even went further in conferring their citizenships by concluding the Treaties on “Regulating the Issues of Dual Citizenship” with Russian Federation,Turkmenistan on 23 December 1993,and Tajikistan on 7 September 1995.As the study identifies,the Russian Federation(RF)as the main and largest successor state to former Soviet Union has its own geopolitical and socio-economic motives behind the permissive dual citizenship policies.Russian “compatriots” living abroad,including the Central Asian states,serve as one of the four main leverages that Russia utilize in its endeavors to preserve and even strengthen its influence in the region.Arguably,the most substantial policy instrument applied toward its“compatriots” in post-Soviet republics was so called “passportization” policy that is the issuance of Russian passports to all the groups included in the notion of Russian“compatriots”.Besides geopolitical aspect,the “passporization” policy is utilized as a response to socio-economic problems primarily caused by the demographic crises Russia has faced since the early 1990 s.Chapter three discusses the variation in dual citizenship legislations in the Central Asian states,namely Tajikistan,Turkmenistan and Kyrgyzstan.The current attitude of Central Asian republics towards dual citizenship with Russia differs from state to state.Among the three states examined here,Tajikistan is the most permissive on this issue.Despite the certain restrictions set forth by the legislation of Tajikistan,it is the only country in the region that de jure and de facto embrace dual citizenship with Russian Federation,which was institutionalized by the conclusion of bilateral Agreement on Regulating the Issues of Dual Citizenship,in 1995.Recognition of dual citizenship in Turkmenistan appeared two years earlier,in 1993,when the analogous agreement on dual citizenship was concluded between Turkmenistan and Russian Federation.However,in 2003,due to some reasons Turkmen authority unilaterally abrogated the agreement and took even more drastic actions towards elimination of the institute of dual citizenship.In Kyrgyzstan,recently adopted amendments to citizenship legislation,introduced the concept of “compatriots with foreign citizenship”,that is,former Kyrgyz citizens who have acquired the citizenship of the Russian Federation or the citizenship of any other country,except for border states(Kazakhstan,Uzbekistan,Tajikistan and China)have the right to obtain the “status of compatriot with foreign citizenship”,which provides them with special rights and privileges,similar to those of Kyrgyz citizens,excluding the political rights and rights to vote.Implementation of such a law implicates de facto recognition of dual citizenship by Kyrgyz Republic.Thus,taking into consideration the recently proposed amendments to the citizenship law of the republic,which stipulates the termination of the provision about dual citizenship status,we can say that the status of dual citizenship in Kyrgyz Republic is de facto recognized,but at the same time de jure denied.Chapter four provides a comparative case study analysis of three countries concerned,where economic,demographical,and political attributes of individual states of CA are examined to explain the divergence in their dual citizenship policies.The economic analysis reveals that among the three republics examined,the republics of Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan are the poorest in the region with their economies heavily dependent on migrant remittances working in Russia,which have served as a prime engine of economic growth,and safeguarding poverty reduction in the countries since the last decade.With regards to Turkmenistan,it is one of the resource abundant countries,where unlike Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan,the chief source of income constitutes the revenue from export of oil and gas.An analysis of political regimes of the states demonstrates that the status of the most authoritarian regimes in CA belongs to Turkmenistan.Arguably,the status of most democratic regime in the region is attributed to Kyrgyz Republic.Meanwhile,as compared to Kyrgyzstan and Turkmenistan,the Republic of Tajikistan occupies the middle position,being not as democratic as Kyrgyzstan and at the same time not as authoritarian as Turkmenistan.This chapter also indicates the difference in perceptions of individual CA states towards Russian Federation.For poor and remittance-dependent republics of Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan,dual citizenship with Russian Federation has been perceived as one of the stabilizing factor for the states’ security,as its employed by governments “to access a steady stream of international capital” in the form of migrant remittances and investments.While,in oil and gas abundant Turkmenistan,since the alleged assassinate attempt against then-President of Turkmenistan,Saparmurat Niyazov,which believed to be organized by the Turkmen opposition leaders,most of whom happened to hold dual Russian citizenship,together with the refusal from Russian government to extradite opposition leaders hiding in Russia,dual citizens have been perceived as a threat to the state’s security.The final chapter five represents summary findings of the research which concurred with the main argument of the study.The results of the rigorous comparative analysis revealed that primarily conditioned by economic factors,the divergence of dual citizenship policies of CA states is also driven by different security concerns that dual citizenship brings about in the states examined.Whereas,the variations in levels of security concerns are conditioned by different political regimes of the countries and leaders’ perceptions of dual citizenship and Russia in general... |
PDF Full Text Request