That was treachery from his government's point of view, but public spirited by his own lights - and those of many others. He might be found guilty in his country's courts if he returns but he should not be denied his national identity unless he chooses to change it. So it is for New Zealanders fighting in Syria, no matter which side they are on.
Western governments have chosen not to help the Syrian uprising as they did Libya's, but there is no doubt they would welcome the overthrow of Assad. Why, then, should they care that a few of their citizens have gone further? Mr Key says: "We don't think it is a sensible step for them to take."
But to take the drastic step of cancelling passports suggests this is more than a concern for their health. Our Foreign Ministry frequently issues warnings against travel to trouble spots but does not usually go this far.
Is the ministry concerned that New Zealanders in the conflict might somehow implicate the country or force it to take action? It is hard to see how that could happen. We are not a neighbouring country capable of being a base for raids and at risk of reprisals across our border.
Is the ministry worried that these people might call on its staff to intercede for them if they are captured or in peril?
An active passport might imply the ministry has that obligation but no reasonable citizen would expect officials to put themselves in the firing line.
Sadly a passport is the property of the issuing state, not the citizen, and can be cancelled for the state's convenience. It may be standard practice but it is simply wrong.
Debate on this article is now closed.
