An alternative view from the New Statesman:"But it's important to remember the questions this judgement does not answer: the legal rights and wrongs of Begum's case are but one part of a smaller set of questions. The first concerns our responsibility as a state for the problems we create: can it really be right to wash our hands of the British fighters still either roaming free or currently incarcerated in what remains of the so-called Islamic State? Can it really be moral to revoke the citizenship of someone born in the United Kingdom on the grounds that they can, thanks to their parents' citizenship, claim citizenship of another country? And if it is, is it really an appropriate or responsible thing for one nation to pass off its responsibility for that person to another?The political argument for the government's position is that there is no electoral downside to 'tough' postures on this issue: that no matter what, you can always win more votes by promising to revoke Shamima Begum's citizenship harder. But the policy reality is that no matter what the courts say, no matter the legal loopholes Home Office lawyers might find, what happens to the foreign fighters who went to join the Islamic State is very much our problem. Its consequences can't be confined to Syria and its neighbours - and the government's attempt to pretend it can will only end in disaster sooner or later".
Caroline Whitehead ● 1864d