Nationality, Citizenship, Democracy, and Integration - Belgium Should No Longer Grant Belgian Nationality to Migrants So Readily

Nationality, citizenship, democracy, and integration require a careful distinction between residence and full membership of the political community. Nationality is more than an administrative document. In a democracy, citizenship means access to political rights, public office, and lasting participation in the community. That is why integration must be central to every policy concerning nationality.

A residence permit for someone who works, pays taxes, and obeys the law is easy to defend. Modern economies function with labour migration and with people who can work globally. Employers look for workers, sectors face shortages, and working newcomers make a valuable contribution. But a passport is not the same as an employment contract. A passport grants voting rights, diplomatic protection, access to certain public-sector positions, and a permanent legal bond with the country. For that reason, nationality should not be the automatic end point of residence.

Belgian citizenship should not be granted so easily

Bad policy arises when the state blurs the distinction between living, working, and full citizenship. Someone who lives in a country temporarily or long-term can have rights and deserve protection. But citizenship also requires reciprocity: knowledge of the language, understanding of the rule of law, loyalty to democratic institutions, and a willingness to participate in a shared society. Origin, religion, or culture should not be decisive; demonstrable integration should be. And this is where things structurally go wrong.

A democracy depends on trust. Citizens must be able to trust that those who receive political rights recognise the rules of that democracy. This means freedom of expression, equal rights for men and women, separation of religion and state, protection of minorities, and acceptance of minorities. Those who support and live by these principles may perhaps become full citizens, but that is not strictly necessary. A residence permit is sufficient. Moreover, those who reject these principles should certainly not automatically gain access to nationality.

The problem, therefore, is not migration itself. The problem is careless policy. When naturalisation becomes mainly a formality to which someone is entitled after a few years, nationality loses its meaning. Citizenship then no longer feels like a shared responsibility, but like a procedural right. This fuels distrust among existing citizens and ultimately harms newcomers who do invest in language, work, and social participation.

Countries can therefore distinguish between the right of residence and nationality. A working migrant can receive a stable residence status, have access to basic services, and be legally protected without immediately receiving full political rights. Nationality can be reserved for people who come from the country. That is not exclusion, but prudence.

Switzerland is often cited as an example of a country with many foreign residents and a very strict naturalisation policy. The Swiss model shows that a high proportion of foreign residents does not automatically have to mean that nationality is granted generously. The idea behind this is that citizenship is something weighty: locally embedded, linguistically grounded, and socially proven. In addition, men must fulfil Swiss military-service obligations when applying for nationality. Whether one wants to fully adopt the Swiss model is a political choice, but the principle deserves serious attention.

A sensible policy should not ask, “How quickly can someone get a passport?” but rather, “When has someone truly become a citizen?” That requires clear requirements, fair assessment, and equal treatment. This does not create collective suspicion of groups, but instead allows a country to make an individual assessment. Not symbolic strictness, but practical standards: language ability and labour participation must be important, as should social contribution, respect for the rule of law, and a clean criminal record. Belgium even naturalises people who may or may not have been convicted of terrorism.

Public-sector jobs require particular attention. Not because people with a migration background should not be allowed to work there, but because public functions require trust. Civil servants serve the state and the citizen, not a party, religion, family network, or foreign influence. That applies to everyone, whether born Belgian or naturalised newcomer. Selection must be based on competence, integrity, and loyalty to the democratic constitutional order. If newcomers, often from non-democratic countries, obtain nationality, they subsequently gain the right as a minority to receive priority for public-sector jobs through positive discrimination. Belgium must prevent this at all times, as Switzerland does.

Making nationality too easy weakens citizenship. Making nationality impossible does not create permanent second-class positions, because people can function perfectly well in Belgium without having nationality. Look at the number of Europeans who live and work here, sometimes for generations. Between those two mistakes lies sensible policy: generous in protection, fair in opportunity, very strict in conditions, and clear about the meaning of democracy.

Residence or nationality is not a right but a privilege. The American minister Rubio expressed this well in response to protests by migrants against Israel, particularly at universities. People from other countries may reside here, but that does not give them the right to protest here or cause trouble whenever something does not suit them or when they oppose government policy. Without nationality, a country can also much more easily deport people who have been convicted. Why should people from a country such as Morocco, where nationality is compulsory, be allowed to hold a second nationality here? To which country are they then loyal? Moreover, obtaining Belgian nationality is not necessary for migrants from, for example, Muslim countries. With a residence permit, they can simply function and work in our country.

Nationality is not a reward for mere presence. It is a declaration of mutual belonging. The state says: you belong permanently with us. The new citizen says: I uphold this democracy, its freedoms, and its responsibilities. Only when that reciprocity is taken seriously and applied very restrictively does citizenship remain valuable.

Image Credits: Planet Volumes via Unsplash

Top of Form

Bottom of Form