I was an editor between 2009 and 2010 for a small magazine aimed at Westerners living in Singapore. Given that it was a lifestyle magazine whose goal was for readers to “join your mates” for “fun, friendship, sports, community,” my editor’s letters were not cerebral critiques. I tried to keep it light, but once in a while a bit of cynicism would seep out. On this occasion, I addressed something that was on the tongues of the expat community for about a week or so. I was expecting a rebuke from the publisher – “Readers would be offended by your stance, this isn't what we're about,” or something like that. But my article was printed and it passed in silence. However, the next month’s December editorial was almost pulled because I said I was indifferent to Christmas. Go figure.
~~~~~~~~~
Is the editor ready to take citizenship?
The government set a few tempers alight when it announced that it would be requiring many Permanent Residents to take up citizenship or risk not having their PR status renewed. Letters flew to the daily papers, and not one PR-holder I knew wasn’t at least a little upset. One correspondent to Today newspaper’s letters section summed up much of what I heard. Peter Wadeley wrote that he has a Singaporean wife and two children, one of whom he said would one day be doing his National Service. But no matter. Even though Singapore is his “home country”, he stated that he "does not feel Singaporean" enough to take citizenship.
That makes me curious. Why not? Well, I can understand. I have been here for three years, and the longer I stay, the more apparent it becomes that Singaporeans in general will never accept a Caucasian as a true-blooded local. I can imagine Mr Wadeley’s son will one day complete his National Service and perhaps speak fluent Mandarin, but will forever be seen as an “expat”. One mixed-race friend of mine, a local citizen who looks Chinese but has a British surname, is often chided by cabbies when they arrive at his call expecting a white guy: “Aiya, you not Singaporean, lah!”
But I can see the other side of the issue. Back in our own countries, those who land on our shores have to abide by strict immigration laws, and are usually given a “love it or leave it” response if they complain about the rules and responsibilities they must comply with. So I can imagine the kind of affront Singaporeans might feel when we prosper from their country’s resources and lifestyle, and then turn around and say that citizenship in their nation is simply inferior to ours.
The unspoken truth is that we want the de facto benefits of dual citizenship. We want the jobs, low taxes and standard of living offered by Singapore, while keeping our birth citizenship as a safety net “just in case.” We want the free (or heavily subsidised) health care offered in most of our countries in case we take seriously ill, and the government pensions due to us upon retirement, and so on. Fair enough.
But so long as we fight to hang on to the best of both worlds, we should accept that this gives our host country the right to define the terms of our stay. Personally, I am unsure that I would become a Singapore national so long as dual citizenship is forbidden. But if citizenship were offered to me, I would feel honoured, not angry, and it is something I would not refuse lightly. Living abroad has helped me appreciate the true meaning of citizenship and the responsibilities of belonging to a country – whether that is here in Singapore or the land that issued my passport.
Note: Two years later, Singaporeans would be forming mass rallies in Hong Lim Park to protest against the influx of foreigners to their homeland. One of their key grievances was related to expats dipping into Singapore's wealth and benefits without having to take part in National Service.
