94 J. Panagiotidis Co-ethnic citizenship is a different story Nor is ius sanguinis particularly useful (or even necessary) for the conveying of citizenship upon ‘co-ethnics’ in other countries. This is a whole different discussion in my opinion which cannot be used to make a case against the ius sanguinis principle. Taking again the example of Germany, the main European supplier of co-ethnic citizenship in past decades, it needs to be stressed that ‘ethnic Germans’ from Eastern Europe did not receive German citizenship by means of the ius sanguinis of the 1913 citizenship law. This was not possible, as in most cases they had no ancestor with German citizenship to refer to. Their claim to citizenship rested on special provisions in the constitution and expellee law, which equalised the status of German Volkszugehörige with that of German citizens. At this point we leave the solid ground of formal citizenship and enter into the murky territory of ‘ethnicity’. But even here, it is not all about ‘descent’. While the peculiar notion of Volkszugehörigkeit is often identified with ‘ethnic descent’, it was much more complex than that: it was actually very much a political-plebiscitary notion predicated on self-avowal (Bekenntnis) as German to be confirmed by an ‘objective’ criterion, which could be language, descent, upbringing, or culture (section 6 of the 1953 Federal Expellee Law).6 ‘Descent’ (Abstammung) – notoriously hard to define in administrative practice – was thus neither a necessary nor a sufficient condition for recognition as a German.7 Conclusion In sum, I would argue that the supposed ‘taintedness’ of ius sanguinis has to do with issues not intrinsic to this principle of transmitting citizenship, namely restrictive admission practices and racially based exclusion. The issue of co-ethnic citizenship should be kept apart from this discussion altogether. History cannot provide the justification for abandoning ius sanguinis, as its use in certain problematic ways and contexts in the past does 6 7 See: http://www.bgbl.de/xaver/bgbl/start.xav?startbk=Bundesanzeiger_ BGBl&jumpTo=bgbl153022.pdf I elaborate on the plebiscitary, quasi-‘Renanian’ nature of the German conception of Volkszugehörigkeit in: Panagiotidis, J. (2012), ‘The Oberkreisdirektor Decides Who Is a German’: Jewish Immigration, German Bureaucracy, and the Negotiation of National Belonging, 1953–1990. Geschichte und Gesellschaft 38, 503–533, esp. 511.