Where does Father Christmas come from? How old do you have to be to buy a lottery ticket? If your adult son declares he's a homosexual, what do you do? If a film or a book insults your religious feelings, what is your reaction? Why are aboriginal peoples seeking self-government? Who has the power to declare war?
Answering such questions appropriately may not define you as a citizen of the world, even in this era of supposed globalization, but it would help get you citizenship in Britain (the first two questions), Germany (the second two), Canada (the next) or the US (the last).
Perhaps never before in human history has so much energy been devoted to trying to establish citizenship tests to define national identity. Judging from the debates raging and the confused choices made, there is as little agreement within each country as there is between them.
In the US, discussions about creating a new citizenship test have been going on for a decade. About US$3.5 million has been spent since 2001 when the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) promised a redesign. In 2004, a report from the National Research Council recommended more bureaucratic consultation, leading to concerns that the process was going to become an extended series of debates. A non-profit concern, the American Institutes for Research, was then asked to make a more practical "feasibility study." On Tuesday, the Citizenship and Immigration Service (the successor to the INS) will announce recommendations about how much the tests should be modified or whether they should be changed at all.
Britain, meanwhile, introduced a new citizenship test in November and is beginning formal induction ceremonies like those in the US. Last week, the Guardian reported that the Netherlands was beginning a pilot program in which tests about Dutch language and culture would be administered to prospective immigrants in their native countries. The government also planned to require all immigrants who stay in the Netherlands more than three years to take citizenship classes. And, earlier this month, the Baden-Wuerttemberg region of Germany instituted questions to be asked only of Muslims from particular countries -- questions dealing with women's rights, religious freedom and domestic life.
One reason for the flurry of activity has been just what the German questions so bluntly address: the phenomenon of Muslim immigrants and citizens in Europe who not only are segregated from a nation's culture but also hostile to it. In 2004, for example, a poll found that 21 percent of Muslims in Germany believed the Koran and the German Constitution were incompatible. Hence these attempts to establish a shared identity based on particular beliefs and facts.
But which ones? Even where the notion of identity would seem to be fairly secure, notions of citizenship can be slight. In Britain, the Home Office minister said the new procedures were meant to "help new citizens to gain a greater appreciation of the civic and political dimensions of British citizenship." But while the 45-minute test includes questions about the structure of the British government and emphasizes Britain's religious identity ("What is the Church of England and who is its head?"), the main emphasis is on the test's title: "Life in the UK."
Judging from news reports and sample questions, the test treats British culture not as a product of centuries of evolution and political struggle with stunning achievements (and failures) -- in fact, there is almost no history on the test at all -- but as a set of practical behaviors along with correct attitudes toward women and ethnic minorities.
The practical can be trivial: If you spill someone else's beer in a pub, what should you do? What is the voltage of British electric outlets? It is as if too much shouldn't be expected, because there is not too much worth championing. Prospective citizens less fluent in English are met with even lower expectations: They take a "skills for life" course instead of an exam and demonstrate their competence to the instructor.
By comparison, the existing US test of history and civics knowledge seems fairly robust. Objections to it arose partly because in the 1990s -- a record decade for immigration -- standards had become so lax, that in many cases background checks of aspirants failed to turn up significant criminal records. In 1997, the Commission on Immigration Reform also found that there was no consistency in administering or scoring the tests; often delivered orally in regional offices, they were sometimes informally scaled by the examiners. The commission also objected to the tests' reliance on memorization of facts rather than on broader concepts.
When the redesign began in earnest in early 2001, "stakeholder groups" -- social service and legal agencies, schools, advocates for immigration -- objected, some contending that the intention was to make the test more difficult and leave less discretion for the examiners. The planned date for a new test, this year, has been abandoned. Alfonso Aguilar, the chief of the Office of Citizenship, suggests that a more realistic goal would be next year or 2008.
The current test covers a fair amount of trivia: the name of the Pilgrims' ship; in which month a president is inaugurated. But there are also important questions about government structure ("Why are there 100 senators in the Senate?") and ideas ("What is the basic belief of the Declaration of Independence?"). No specific replacement questions have been publicly proposed.
"We see the test as an instrument to promote civic learning and patriotism," Aguilar said in a telephone interview last week. The purpose, he said, is not to limit immigration but to create a system in which the process of naturalization works. "Our history has been one of expanded citizenship," he said.
A new test could do no better than emphasize that point and demonstrate the kinds of commitments made in citizenship. The process, after all, is called naturalization because it really does change the alien into the natural, the foreign into the familiar. The immigrant is giving up one identity and taking on another; in the process, both country and citizen are transformed.
This has tended to be easier in the US, where the very idea of the nation is bound up with immigration, than in countries whose idea of the nation is bound up with an inherited past. Yet now, even European nations must present themselves in another form, as sets of ideas and customs, as cultures being offered in exchange for sacrifices demanded. That social contract is not being negotiated with much confidence in Britain, and it seems shaky enough elsewhere, too. The US generally seems more sure of what it is offering; coming months will show how sure it is of what it is asking.
BORDER PATROL
Here are some sample questions from the new tests:
BRITAIN
● How interested are young people in politics? What do they see as the main issues today?
● Do women have equal rights and has this always been the case?
● How many people say they have a religion and how many attend religious services? What are the largest religious groups?
● Where are Geordie, Cockney and Scouse dialects spoken?
● What are quangos and non-departmental public bodies?
BADEN-WUERTTEMBERG
● What is your position on the statement that a wife should belong to her husband and that he can beat her if she isn't obedient?
● What do you think about parents forcibly marrying off their children? Do you think that such marriages are compatible with human dignity?
● Your fully grown daughter/your wife wants to dress like other German women. Would you try to stop that? By what means?
● Imagine that your grown son comes to you and declares that he is a homosexual and wants to live with another man. How would you react?
Sources: www.lifeintheuktest.gov.uk, www.islam.de.
A return to power for former US president Donald Trump would pose grave risks to Taiwan’s security, autonomy and the broader stability of the Indo-Pacific region. The stakes have never been higher as China aggressively escalates its pressure on Taiwan, deploying economic, military and psychological tactics aimed at subjugating the nation under Beijing’s control. The US has long acted as Taiwan’s foremost security partner, a bulwark against Chinese expansionism in the region. However, a second Trump presidency could upend decades of US commitments, introducing unpredictability that could embolden Beijing and severely compromise Taiwan’s position. While president, Trump’s foreign policy reflected a transactional
Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) has prioritized modernizing the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) to rival the US military, with many experts believing he would not act on Taiwan until the PLA is fully prepared to confront US forces. At the Chinese Communist Party’s 20th Party Congress in 2022, Xi emphasized accelerating this modernization, setting 2027 — the PLA’s centennial — as the new target, replacing the previous 2035 goal. US intelligence agencies said that Xi has directed the PLA to be ready for a potential invasion of Taiwan by 2027, although no decision on launching an attack had been made. Whether
A chip made by Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) was found on a Huawei Technologies Co artificial intelligence (AI) processor, indicating a possible breach of US export restrictions that have been in place since 2019 on sensitive tech to the Chinese firm and others. The incident has triggered significant concern in the IT industry, as it appears that proxy buyers are acting on behalf of restricted Chinese companies to bypass the US rules, which are intended to protect its national security. Canada-based research firm TechInsights conducted a die analysis of the Huawei Ascend 910B AI Trainer, releasing its findings on Oct.
In honor of President Jimmy Carter’s 100th birthday, my longtime friend and colleague John Tkacik wrote an excellent op-ed reassessing Carter’s derecognition of Taipei. But I would like to add my own thoughts on this often-misunderstood president. During Carter’s single term as president of the United States from 1977 to 1981, despite numerous foreign policy and domestic challenges, he is widely recognized for brokering the historic 1978 Camp David Accords that ended the state of war between Egypt and Israel after more than three decades of hostilities. It is considered one of the most significant diplomatic achievements of the 20th century.