Leave the Netherlands Now (Maybe)

Yesterday Dutch MP Ayaan Hirsi Ali was told, by Rita Verdonk, that she is not entitled to Dutch Citizenship, because she lied on her application for refugee status.

In 1992.

It wasn't a secret that she'd lied on the application, at least not since she was vetted as a member of the VVD, the party to which Ms Verdonk also belongs.

In 2002.

There was a marathon debate in parliament yesterday. I saw some of it on TV - the part where Ms Verdonk repeated "she has six weeks to respond" in response to each and every question.

The debate ended in the small hours of this morning, with Ms Verdonk forced to reconsider her decision.

A majority of the political parties in parliament backed two motions on the issue. One calls on Verdonk to reconsider within six weeks whether Hirsi Ali is a Dutch citizen. The second instructs the Minister to grant Hirsi Ali accelerated naturalisation if she finds she is not a citizen of the Netherlands.

This whole thing stinks.

Firstly: Would Hirsan Ali have qualified if she had not lied on her form? The answer to this seems to be yes, since the only items that have been admitted into the public as lies are her name, her date of birth, that she did not come directly from Somalia but instead via a refugee camp in Kenya. There hasn't been anything reported indicating that she did not have the "well founded fear of persecution" which is the main criterion for refugee status. As one person commmented "is she less of a refugee because she went through three civil wars rather than five?"

Genuine refugee applicants as a group are highly likely to lie; they have a good reason to protect their identity, and a need to tell their story in the most convincing way. If Ms Verdonk wants to pursue the "regels zijn regels" (rules are rules) mentality there will be thousands of former refugees forced to leave the Netherlands and return to their home countries - which are often still war torn.

Secondly: Why now? Hirsan Ali declared all of this when she was vetted as a member of the parliament in 2002, and stated it again in 2003

One part of the answer might be found in the recent case of Taida Pasic, the young Kosovo woman forced to return to her homeland despite being on the verge of sitting school exams. Verdonk's strict adherance to the rules led to the case being decided in record time.

So this is just to be consistent.

Or not.

Hirsan Ali has been an outspoken member of parliament on the issues of integration and emancipation particularly in relation to Islam. She was the author behind the movie Submission, (for which director Theo Van Gogh was murdered). She has been widely criticised as a divisive element in Dutch society.

Verdonk is ambitious and was leading the popularity stakes as the next leader of her party. Perhaps she thought that this would score points from those who disapproved of Hirsan Ali. She seems to have miscalculated I've heard from more than one Dutch person "I'm no fan of Hirsan Ali but this is do dumb."

Hirsan Ali resigned her position in parliament as of yesterday but apparently still has a job offer with a think tank in the US.

Spreek je Nederlands?

Many years ago, about a year after I arrived here, I met a Dutch friend's Grandmother. A doughty eighty year old, thin as wire, who had rescued her husband from German soldiers and raised their sons alone after his death. She was smart and fierce with her grandsons, concerned with their success and well-being.

She asked me if I spoke Dutch "Spreek je Nederlands?" when I said no, she responded in flawless English with a very light accent "Well that's all right because I speak English".

About four years ago she died, but I've been thinking of her in light of Minister Verdonk's latest announcement that we should all speak Dutch, and only Dutch, in the streets. Here's an article in English on the subject.

The Minister proposes this as part of enforcing Dutch norms and values on immigrants. Yet she herself lists 'non-discrimination' as a Dutch value. According to Expatica.com 'She plans to sit down with experts to see "what's important, what the Dutch identity is". '

The Dutch reaction to this announcement is amazement. Even the politicians haven't been able to resist pointing out how ridiculous this is, they spent the following day peppering their debate with foreign terms.

Most people, foreigners and Dutch alike, see this proposal as prejudiced and unworkable. Many have made the easy comparison other regimes that have introduced language controls; Nazi Germany, Franco's Spain, colonising America/Australia/New Zealand etc. It's hardly a list of the honoured and admired.

In Amsterdam, a city where roughly half the population is either born outside the Netherlands or who has a parent born outside the Netherlands, you can hear 10 or 20 languages in a day: the shuffling silibants of Polish, the rolling staccato of an African dialect, the gutteral mystery of Turkish, ubiquitous English, the heat of Spanish, a whisper of French. And occasionally there's a conversation in Dutch. For me it's part of the charm of the city, and there certainly aren't enough police in the land to enforce such legislation as Minister Verdonk is currently considering.

But, just in case it is passed, I've enrolled in a course in the Frisian Language. Goemoarn Rita.

Burqa Ban

Verdonk Seeks a Ban on the Burqa (10 October 2005)
Rita Verdonk, Minister of Foreigner Affairs and Integration will investigate the possibility of banning the use of a burqa in specific situations. According to the minister a general, nationwide ban is not possible.

Why? I'm no fan of the Burqa, but I've lived here since 1998 and have yet to see a woman wearing one. There are many muslim women in Amsterdam, mostly from Turkey and Morrocco, and mostly they wear a headcovering that doesn't cover the face. Rarely have I seen a woman wearing something that covered the mouth, and I've never seen a woman wearing one that covers her eyes in any way.

So why waste time discussing this in parliament? I have two theories:
(1) The Red Herring. While we and the press are distracted with this nonsense item something else is being passed.
(2) The Bait and Switch. Proposing an extreme action, watching us overreact, then backing down to a more modest proposal that is allowed to pass.

I'm going with theory 2, Verdonk has used this before, for example her initial far reaching proposals for all immigrants to go through an integration course regardless of time spent in the Netherlands or whether they held Dutch citizenship. She came undone because the EU laws regarding freedom of movement.

I'm waiting to see what her real intent is.