Recently we’ve seen the news reports about a Hungarian actress who has been refused a passport by Russian authorities because of her citizenship of origin and then had all of her assets seized by the government as part of their attempt to recoup some of the billions of dollars they’d lost in the scandal. It’s easy to criticize the Russian government for being callous and heartless, but there’s no question that the way they treated Isabel Svoboda was both legally and ethically unjustified. The problem is that it also raises questions about the increasingly expanding definition of nationality and nationalities, whether or not those definitions are being expanded to the benefit of the Russian government or its citizens. And whether or not such an expansion is sustainable over the long run.
The International Working Consultants Association (IWCA) recently held a workshop on “Nationality and Age.” In this workshop, Dr. Isabel Svoboda, a sociologist at the University of Minnesota’s Center for Latino Studies, attempted to present the issue of national identity through the lens of marriage and ethnicity. She examined three national identities in particular: ethnic identity, national origin identity, and parental heritage identity. After conducting qualitative research on these three identities, she concluded that “age” does not play a key role in the definition of nationality or ethnic identity, that older age is an important factor in determining one’s place within a family of origin, but that “age” and “parental background” have more to do with occupation than occupation in their definitions.
If we’re to expand the definition of nationality to include older age and ethnicity, what does that mean for the potential partner of an international student or expat? What about the future of marriage for an expat or immigrant with an ethnic background outside of their homeland? Is our definition of marriage being expanded to accommodate the changing definition of nationalities and ethnicities?