Listen to this article:

There are many ways for a country to make international headlines. You can launch satellites, become the world’s fastest-growing economy, build digital public infrastructure admired across continents, or position yourself as a geopolitical balancing power between East and West.

Or, alternatively, you can spend a week explaining why a passport may not necessarily prove what billions of people around the world have long assumed it proves. One suspects this was not the intended outcome.

The recent controversy surrounding statements on passports and citizenship is interesting because of what it reveals about governance. The issue isn’t about law but about trust. Not about documentation but about communication. Technically, governments and lawyers may have perfectly valid arguments. Citizenship is governed by one set of laws. Passports are issued under another. There may be exceptional situations where legal distinctions matter.

The problem is that ordinary citizens do not live inside legal textbooks but in the real world, where a passport occupies a rather special place. It is not merely a travel document. It is a symbol of belonging. It is the document that allows an Indian engineer to enter Singapore, a student to attend university in London, a family to holiday in Thailand, or a business executive to board a flight to New York without being treated as an international mystery.

For most people, the passport is the practical manifestation of citizenship. Attempting to separate the two in public discourse is a bit like announcing that while a wedding ring may indicate marriage, it should not necessarily be interpreted as proof that the couple know each other. A technical explanation may exist. A communications disaster arrives much faster.

Also read:........

© The Wire