POLAR The Tibetan government-in-exile had previously dissuaded Tibetans from taking up Indian citizenship, fearing it will dilute their movement and identity as Tibetan nationals (Falcone & Wangchuk, 2008; Hess, 2006; McConnell, 2013, 2016). However, after the legal changes implemented by the Indian state, they asserted that individual Tibetans could choose to acquire Indian citizenship. However, not all Tibetans found this genuine and felt implicit pressure from the government-in-exile. What Woeser was articulating was both the government-in-exile’s implicit coercion and its complicity in the Indian state’s memorandum. Both Woeser and her husband worked for the exile state. She was deeply unhappy with this clause. It seemed unjust. “The prime minister (srid-skyong) also has a green card and so many of the cabinet members have citizenship of some country or the other,” she lamented. “It is just convenience (di stab bde tsham gyi ched du yin),” she said, about acquiring an Indian passport. “Convenience” indicates that obtaining an Indian passport could improve refugee life but would not compromise Woeser’s identity as a Tibetan national. For Woeser, her Tibetanness was not at stake. She was comfortable with a hybridity of engagements and possibilities. Her identity, culture, and tastes were transformed by the migratory experience of her community (Glick-Schiller, 2021). Her love for Hindi movies and shows and her enthusiasm for Indian food persisted alongside her expertise in Tibetan medicine, her knowledge of Tibetan folklore, and her brilliance as a cook of Tibetan cuisine. Her articulation of national belonging was informed by being Tibetan in India. Thus, legal status was just “convenience”—an easing of the precarity of statelessness that had resulted in intergenerational disenfranchisement. What Woeser articulates here is a “feeling citizenship,” which is “socially and politically recognized in the everyday life of the community” and exists as a “bond” within the community (Simpson, 2014, 173). “Feeling citizenship” is difficult to strip away through legal status. It is cultivated through understandings of one’s own genealogy and built in relation with others. It remains outside the control and circumscription of sovereign power. Like Namgyal Dolkar, Woeser, too, was disaggregating legal status from national identity. But unlike Namgyal Dolkar, she was compelled to remain stateless because of the conditional offer of Indian citizenship. What did those mean for Woeser? Woeser and her husband were employees of the CTA, and their livelihood depended on remaining RC holders. Woeser’s children attended Tibetan Children’s Villages (TCV), schools in exile aimed at preserving Tibetan language and culture. These institutions are vital for instilling national identity and cultivating a sense of nationalism (Hess, 2006; McConnell, 2009). Additionally, her family lived in the staff quarters at GangKyi. That was her home. They were integral members of the community and had helped grow the institutions they were affiliated with. How could she risk losing it all? This risk varies across second-generation Tibetans in India. For some, it was possible to give up the RC on account of personal wealth and/or lack of reliance on exile state facilities. Those Tibetans who had broken away from the exile state, or whose families had moved to India before 1959, did not have Woeser’s barriers in procuring Indian citizenship. However, many second-generation Tibetans were also in Woeser’s position—whose economic and existential entanglements with the Tibetan exile community made Indian citizenship impossible. Additionally, for many marginalized communities without access to formal political processes, legal citizenship does not provide equal access to rights and entitlements (Alves, 2019; Chatterjee, 2004; see also Holston, 2008). These populations, including Tibetans, depend on political communities and representatives to negotiate with the state. The conditions for Indian citizenship laid down by the MEA were therefore demanding more than just surrendering entitlements. They were also asking Tibetans to sever ties with the political representatives who acted as mediators between them and the Indian state. For Woeser, the benefits of citizenship did not measure up to removal from community. However, while Woeser aspired for the “convenience” of Indian citizenship, there are those who do not see it as affording much convenience. This featured in my conversation with Sonam and his sister, Tsering. The three of us were at Nechung Café in Dharamsala in summer 2023. Sonam and I had been friends for many years. He had come to Dharamsala from the Tibetan settlement in Sumdho, Ladakh—a high-altitude region where people engaged in nomadic herding—and was pursuing his PhD at an Indian university. He frequently visited his family in Ladakh. 15552934, 2024, 2, Downloaded from https://anthrosource.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/plar.12580 by Test, Wiley Online Library on [07/03/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License 182