Journal of Human Rights 111 efforts to form a Global Alliance to End Statelessness. As plans for the next phase of the ending statelessness enterprise are underway, it is important to take stock of developments and consider alternative possible approaches. More broadly, and in line with the emerging field of critical statelessness studies, this article poses pragmatic, strategic, and ethical questions around the globalized) discourse on addressing—and, indeed, ending—statelessness that have been dominant in legal approaches to the topic. I undertake this critical analysis of the IBelong campaign from the position of a mostly external observer. Let me note for the sake of transparency that I previously worked for UNHCR (in Iraq during 2015–2017), but I never directly had any responsibilities relating to the elaboration or implementation of the IBelong campaign during that time. As such, this largely external positionality both presents limitations to understand internal dynamics within the organization of the IBelong campaign (as might be accessible to other assessments directly facilitated and/or funded by UNHCR) and ensures an independent distance. Nonetheless, my observations have been informed by parallel engagements on statelessness for over a decade, including as an individual member of the European Network on Statelessness since 2017. Additionally, since leaving UNHCR, I have been invited to participate in a number of roundtables and workshops organized by the agency in my capacity as an academic and civil society practitioner involved in statelessness work (e.g., as cocoordinator of the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) Statelessness Network). In particular, participation in consultations around the elaboration of planning for the Global Alliance to End Statelessness exposed me to valuable insights about framing relating to both the IBelong campaign and its successor project. Structurally, the first part of the article focuses on the emergence of a global approach to addressing statelessness historically, tracing the progressive application of UNHCR’s global mandate on identifying, reducing, and preventing statelessness, as well as protecting those affected by it. The next section discusses the introduction of UNHCR’s 10-year IBelong Campaign to End Statelessness (2014–2024) and considers the findings of existing evaluations conducted on the campaign to date (Batchelor, 2019; Resonance Frontier Market Solutions, 2021; UNHCR, 2021). Building on this background to the IBelong campaign, the rest of the article draws critical lessons from other contexts in which an aspirational eradication paradigm has been employed to underpin international advocacy efforts (e.g., 2005’s Make Poverty History and End AIDS by 2030). This is done for the purpose of discussing gaps left by dominant approaches in statelessness work taken to date. The concluding section of the article looks beyond the IBelong campaign to reflect on future implications of the continued hegemonic use of the “statelessness eradication” frame, as well as considering alternative approaches. Contribution to the emerging field of critical statelessness studies This article is situated within an emerging body of critical literature on the phenomenon of statelessness. As noted, historically the study of statelessness has been dominated by legal approaches: In other words, most of the early scholars engaged with the topic conceived of statelessness as a legal problem, and consequently worked to propose legal solutions (e.g., Weiss, 1979). Primarily, attention was given to analysis of the text of the nationality law(s) relevant to a given context, with limited consideration going to experiences outside the legal text. The prevalence of such approaches led Jason Tucker to conclude in 2018 that academic work on statelessness was “yet to break free from its legal origins” (p. 4). Although the last decade has seen a gradual increase in interdisciplinary approaches toward the topic (Recalde-Vela et al., 2019), a number of commentators have recently concluded that a multidisciplinary field of statelessness studies is now finally in formation (Baluarte, 2019; Brennan, 2019). However, critical engagement is not simply about embracing interdisciplinary perspectives (although that is arguably an essential component). Rather, as Deirdre Brennan and I have proposed elsewhere, it is necessary to present “counter-hegemonic narratives around the nature and experiences of statelessness” that interrogate assumptions that have largely become embedded