"Canadians" of Convenience

Every time that I've checked the newstands this week, I'm overcome by a sense of deja vu. That's because everyday this week, the front page article has been about the evacuation of Canadians from Lebanon.

There are allegedly up to 40,000 Canadians in Lebanon that may require evacuation. This figure astounds me. WTF - 40,000?! How can there be so many?! I don't think there are 40,000 Lebanese in Toronto! What are they all doing there?!

George Jonas, columnist at the National Post, clears it up:

As it turns out, the figure is both right and wrong. Yes, Canada has 40,000, maybe even 50,000, nationals who may need rescuing or assistance to leave Lebanon; and no, it doesn't have 40,000 citizens there in any meaningful sense of the word. Rather, it has 40,000 holders of Canadian passports.

Among the thousands with Canadian papers, some are genuine citizens... The rest are essentially foreigners with Canadian documents. Fouad Boustani of the Canadian-Lebanese Chamber of Commerce estimates that 25,000 to 30,000 people resettled in Lebanon in the past decade. They're paper-citizens, people whose existence and concerns are focused outside Canada, but who have found it convenient to include Canada in their dual citizenship -- or, sometimes, multiplicity of citizenships. They are, quite literally, citizens of convenience.

Canadian passports are convenient -- which is why they're popular, and not only in Lebanon. They come with great benefits, potentially life-saving in volatile places, and oblige the holder to nothing. His sole investment is three years' residence, to be spent in Canada, a place notorious for its abysmal weather... Since 1977, no one has to give up any former citizenship; he can just add Canada's passport to his collection. People can come and go, live in a warmer climate, never set foot in Canada again, run for office in their real countries, nip back in for their open heart surgery, the works.

Jonas goes on to say that, because they are holders of Canadian passports, we are obliged to rescue them.

The authorities take the position, very properly, that anyone who is technically a Canadian is a Canadian and must be rescued, airlifted, whatever, even from his own country. We must pluck such a person on demand from his place of birth and choice of permanent residence at Canadian taxpayers' expense and at the risk of Canadian lives: That's what a piece of paper says.

I also like his closing argument:

Needless to say, citizens of convenience do nothing illegal or even unethical. They simply take advantage of the opportunity offered by our increasingly relaxed requirements and definitions of citizenship, which permit people with little or no commitment and investment in this country to share in its protection and benefits.

...a news clip showing what looks like a group of dual-citizenship Canadians yelling at a single-citizenship Canadians for not rescuing them fast enough, seems incongruous: incongruous, and not very pretty. It also makes one wonder if that decision in 1977 to permit polygamous citizenship -- not too sound under the best of circumstances -- shouldn't be considered barking mad in this volatile world of shifting alliances and international terror.

Damn, I just cited half his column. It's too good. Never mind. I agree with him wholeheartedly on this. Rather than complain that we didn't get there quick enough, these Canadians of convenience should show some gratitude. Smiley and I were watching the news coverage of this on CBC and one guy, I kid you not, was complaining that his boat didn't have A/C! I'd be grateful to have got a free ticket out of a warzone. A little show of appreciation would be nice.

And what's with this dual-citizenship nonsense? Great way to take advantage of a country's frills and benefits while giving nothing in return. Just as one can't have two mothers, one can't divide one's loyalty between two nations.