Taiwan_Student wrote: Now, where can I get Hartzel's card. He sure helped me in the beginning, but I think he is spinning his wheels on this one. I am forever in his debt for walking me through each stage from ARC, to work permit and to getting my kids Taiwanese Citizenship. I wish he'd come back to the fold and start arguing for Dual citizenship rights.
This is the website of the self-proclaimed "taiwan civil government". As far as I know Hartzell has opened his own government though. It's a bit like the anti-pope also having an anti-pope.
Dual nationality is already a reality for foreigners of countries that do not release their citizens from the original citizenship, i.e. Japan although Japan does not condone dual-nationality. It is interesting that for practical purposes Japanese nationality law leads to Japanese citizens being able to naturalise as ROC citizens and retain their Japanese citizenship. There are countless other examples of this, i.e. the Philippines that declares any renunciation for the purpose of naturalisation abroad null and void. Instead of pestering the NIA and Legislative Yuan foreigners should petition their own governments to come up with regulations that makes giving up their citizenship impossible for the purpose of naturalisation in the ROC.
Actually, those are very difficult exceptions and the ROC immigration would most likely decline the petition. In most circles, the issue is a hush-hush, because it is very delicate. And coming from one of those places, it has actually more disadvantages not being able to renounce to your nationality than being able to relinquish and get another one.
The Japanese thing is due to historical links. It is an exception, not a general rule. As said, if whitey attempts the same, it will be a tough, not likely to win fight.
As to Hartzel and the whole ROC/Taiwan thing, it is the argument set forth by hardliners here as to why we cannot have a Taiwan country, since all treaties and accords have been signed as ROC. However, the treaties with China are negotiated among polities parties, KMT and CCP. That ain't that clear. Hartzel and others have some legal arguments regarding Taiwan as a protectorate thanks to historical precedents and the ambivalences in international treaties and lots of gaping holes left in the development of the government here. To make matters worse, the way the ROC sold itself in the past abroad means people confuse this with China still. Identity and nationality do not go hand in hand in this nation, though we have managed to live peacefully striving for common goals so far. However, as the noose tightens around the neck of the people, due to the goals of a few to turn it into their own piggy bank,. the question of loyalty is asked of those with their hand tight on the grip. The foreigners have no beef in this fight, at most like Hartzel would like to build a wall both sides would respect until the time is such that negotiations can be engaged for all to be benefited, not just a few. This is where the strife lies now. We like it here, we want to contribute, but we feel that hope is fading fast, as well as resources, due to the negligent idea of just passing by and milking this island for quick profit by people who are not foreigners. That is not our general attitude, many foreigners have given a lot to the development of this nation, without receiving recognition. Some have been honored with APRCs. Some have turned Taiwanese. Some just keep fighting silent and relentlessly.