 |
An American Muslim solider in a mosque. (AP photo) |
Major Nidal Malik Hasan had surprised everyone when he opened fire at his colleagues in the US military base. Although he is a psychiatrist, he suddenly lost his special ability to control his emotions and expressed his inner fury, which needs an explanation.
He is a US citizen from an Arab origin. Thus, media dealt with him on the basis of his Arab identity, despite his American citizenship.
It is not the first incident that took place in the "Fort Hood" base. There were similar incidents where the perpetrators were US citizens serving in the military, except they had an American identity.
If violence came from a US citizen with American name, and white western origin, then violence would be seen as a psychological illness. But if it came from a US citizen with an Arab or Islamic identity, it becomes a case of violence against Western civilization, and he would certainly become a terrorist.
Identity Is not Granted
| While an immigrant can gain a new citizenship, he/she cannot easily gain a new identity. |
An American citizen with non-western origins is treated as a citizen of a different identity. He is, at end of the day, different. Assimilated with his peers by his citizenship, and dissimilated on the basis of his different identity.
While an immigrant can gain a new citizenship, he cannot easily gain a new identity. He cannot change identity over night. One gains his identity through the social and historical interaction. Societies do not expand its identity to anyone; the state grants a citizenship, not an identity.
Thus, a society may accept or reject incoming immigrants. At best, it may treat them as citizens of different identities. Immigrants feel that they are different, and the community treats them differently, too.
Actually, citizenship is granted according to the laws of the State, but identity may be acquired over several decades, and may not be acquired by first-generation immigrants. Their second-generation or third may be able to get it.
However, some immigrant communities preserve their identity and transcend it from one generation to another. Although they remain state's nationals enjoying rights and duties of citizenship, but in the meantime they preserve their own identity.
There is a difference hence between citizenship and identity. Citizenship is a legal contract between state and individuals. A legal contract which defines the rights and duties of each party, but identity is a social awareness which determines the individual's values, habits and behavior.
Citizenship Vs. Identity
| With U.S. war on Iraq, American citizenship becomes in conflict with the Arab identity. |
In Major Nidal case, everyone dealt with him as an American citizen with an Arab identity. This dimension was very clear in most media coverage of the event.
But the problem is deepening more in the battlefield, when an American citizen with an Arab identity serving in the army fights Arab countries. This leads to a conflict between citizenship and identity, while a battle is already going on the ground.
With US war on Iraq, American citizenship becomes in conflict with the Arab identity. However, identity always prevails, because identity builds a deep rooted character. Without an identity a person might be moving toward psychological and social breakdown.
That is the problem. Is it necessary for Arab Americans to participate in the war waged by America against the Arab and Muslim world? Here we ask why the US military is out into a war outside its borders.
It often comes out in defense of its interests, values, and world's role; the Armed Forces fight to help the USA lead the world. However, a war with colonial dimensions poses moral challenge for immigrants when it's launched against an identity they belong to. For them, it is not a war for a good cause.
But the war to defend homeland's security is another issue. If America is invaded by another army, every US citizen will defend the homeland. Defense would be a legal duty on each citizen based on the citizenship's legal contract.
Belonging to State or Community?
| The paradox can be seen in state's acceptance and community rejection of immigrants. |
An Immigrant obtains a state's nationality, and he/she is under obligation to defend it. The defense of the homeland is an integral part of citizenship duties.
So, the problem now is only related to the question of identity, especially in a war against immigrant's fellow people who share the same identity.
Here, immigrants find themselves as outsiders, not only because tey do not feel belonging to the new identity, but because the community does not treat them equally.
If a person immigrated to France and got the French nationality; he would not get the French identity, nor be recognized as a member of the French community. None would consider him French despite his/her French citizenship.
The paradox can be seen in state's acceptance and community rejection of immigrants.
The immigrants in society must be aware of this dilemma. They are obliged by the law to hold citizenship. However, they will remain to hold their own identity, because it is the product of their social and cultural history.
If a person decides to get out of his original identity, he can gain a new identity over the course of time. This is an individual decision for those who want to take.
But not all immigrants are under any obligation to do so. Any immigrant can pass a moment of conflict between identity and citizenship, when he fights his own original identity or his fellow people.
We must consider this war; as a war which contradicts the cultural beliefs of many immigrants. Immigrant, by virtue of identity, is not qualified for a war against his country of origin, but his participation in that war many lead him to an existential crisis. Thus, such war must be an optional war especially for Arab immigrants.
Decisive Moment
The identity lasts throughout one's existence. An individual can change his citizenship and nationality several times. Although one can gain citizenship through paper work, but gaining an identity is a lifetime journey.
Citizenship is organized by law and state polices; while loss of citizenship leads to a legal limbo, the loss of identity leads to a conflict of civilization. So immigrant represents a special case, when he fails to assimilate with the new society.
In such an event, the immigrant is in a deep conflict between his citizenship and his identity. He has to choose, in this defining moment, between citizenship and identity. It is a choice between his legal status, and his entity.
This is the most painful and decisive moment in the history of any human being.
|
