I enjoyed reading Mr. Reiman’s book, and here are five reasons in support of his dual nationality argument:
1. The origins of prejudice against dual nationality stem from war and the desire for certainty regarding who can be trusted when lives are at stake. If that is true, there seems to be little if any need for such prejudice in times of peace. Keeping that prejudice in play during times of peace communicates a perceived need for preparedness in case of future war. The deep symbiotic relationship between the U.S. and Japan has, long since, outgrown the need for such preparedness. So, keeping it in play is dishonorable.
2. For as long as man has kept written history, leaders have recognized that dual nationality is a tool to keep the peace. Emperors and kings frequently married the offspring of rulers from other nations thereby creating a dual national in their spouse while encouraging peace and cooperation between the nations.
3. Pressuring or forcing dual nationals to renounce one of their citizenships is analogous to creating a brick-less Berlin Wall. It locks in the citizen by making defection more difficult such that poor governance need not result in loss of subjects.
4. Pressuring or forcing dual nationals to renounce one of their citizenships communicates that love of country must equate to love of the country’s government – as opposed to communicating government’s duty to earn the love of its citizens.
5. Prejudice against dual nationality is a stance against value pluralism. Yet, value pluralism is an essential need for the long-term stability of an open democratic society.