The Grimshaw Review of International Affairs Vol. 2, No. 1 narrative, which categorises the Rohingya as “Bengali illegal immigrants” rather than as a legitimate ethnic group (Ansar, 2020, p. 441; Milton et al., 2017, p. 2). Such constructed labels are not only descriptive, but also function as a means of exclusion, thereby legitimising systemic human rights violations. Constructivist approaches emphasise the “meanings in terms of which action is organised arising out of interaction” (Wendt, 1992, p. 403), highlighting the potential for identity to evolve through sustained engagement. The Rohingya crisis therefore, although a profound humanitarian emergency, also presents an opportunity to challenge and transform the constructed meanings which uphold and fuel the ongoing persecution. Indeed, identity is central to understanding state and non-state actors’ preferences and behaviours (Collins, 2013, p. 74), suggesting that the international community can play a role in reconstructing narratives of belonging for stateless populations. Transnational solidarity networks – comprised of NGOs, legal actors, international organisations, humanitarian actors, and more recently the digital space – have the capacity to intervene in these social constructions, challenging exclusionary state narratives through strategic norm creation. By depicting and defining the Rohingya’s experiences as a violation of universal human rights rather than as a domestic issue reliant on solely regional support, these networks can rouse global attention and galvanise states into forms of meaningful action. Transnational solidarity, if reconceptualised within a constructivist framework, has the potential to limit, if not altogether cease, state-centric systems of exclusion for the Rohingya. Wendt emphasises how states operate within a system that reproduces both identities and structural norms, which can result in the transformative potential of sustained resistance within these structures (1999, p. 10-11). Efforts by transnational networks to advocate for the Rohingya exemplify this resistance through their leveraging of international mechanisms, representing efforts to collectively engage in the “strategic social construction” of new norms (Baylis et al., 2023, p. 199). When human rights organisations challenge the Burmese government through mechanisms like international legal petitions, they do not simply aim to 11