Water 2020, 12, 340 2 of 28 and far less in extreme heat [6]. The problem, however, is the extent to which these images are de-politicised—presented as effects without clear causes or means of resolution. Water issues induced by drought, natural disasters, war, occupation, economic blockade, geopolitical conflict, and pollution are collapsed into one monolithic category of ‘global water challenges’. The Middle East in particular hosts some of today’s most devastating water crises—all poised to worsen—but existing analyses regarding lack of water often erroneously point to physical scarcity as the sole cause. This article analyses how international law impacts people affected by water access limitations, restrictions, and denial, focusing on water access issues for groups already facing challenges resulting from ambiguous legal statuses—people who are stateless, displaced, and/or residing in armed conflict zones. By 2025, half the world’s population of 7.6 billion is expected to live in water-stressed areas [7]. The Middle East “is the most water-stressed region in the world with 7 percent of the world’s population but only 1.5 percent of its renewable freshwater supply”, worsening “as populations grow to more than 430 million individuals in 2025”, compared with 300 million in 2006 and 100 million in 1960, and as “climate change begin[s] to manifest” [8]. In addition to its unique status as the “most water-stressed region”, the Middle East contains several active armed conflicts and top source countries for refugees and internally displaced people (IDPs)—including approximately 12 million displaced Syrians as of December 2018 and more than 5 million Palestinian refugees and their descendants displaced in 1948 and 1967 [9,10]. Some of the most prominent contemporary cases that demonstrate the challenges that arise in instances when statelessness, displacement, and/or armed conflict intersect with water access restrictions include the water crisis in the occupied Palestinian West Bank and blockaded Gaza Strip [11–14]; the ‘weaponisation’ of water in Syria and Iraq—a phenomenon that reached new heights following the rise of the Islamic State (IS) [15]; and water scarcity and an accompanying cholera epidemic plaguing Yemen in the midst of violent conflict [16]. International humanitarian law (IHL) and refugee law established post-World War II were designed to cope with civilian rights during armed conflict, displacement, and statelessness. A substantial body of international water law exists to deal with transboundary water usage. There is a significant lacuna, however, regarding law regulating water access and for people facing challenges resulting from ambiguous legal statuses because they are stateless or displaced or who are vulnerable as armed conflict zone residents. This void requires new scholarship to advance the understanding of international law’s role in addressing this phenomenon. In this way, this article makes a novel contribution. This article does not endeavour to be a strictly legal treatise or a study about the evolution of the human right to water per se. It sets forth a new analytical framework for analysing law’s (in)ability to be a guarantor of essential human rights with respect to water. It analyses gaps between bodies of international law relating to water rights that one would presume interconnected—IHL, international water law, international human rights law, and international criminal law—but that, in reality, are siloed from one another, resulting in grievous disconnects and deficiencies within international law. On the subject of fragmentation in international law [17], Matthew Craven articulates, “with the proliferation of international courts and tribunals and the rapid development of certain ‘spheres’ of international law, the international legal system is poised on the brink of a potentially irreversible process of fragmentation” [18]. Gerry Simpson notes, “it is becoming increasingly difficult to view international law as a coherent set of norms or a single field or, even, a sensibility . . . indeed, there is now a separate subject of international law called ‘fragmentation’” [19]. Additionally, international law, at present, overlooks the critical ways in which “[w]ater access and rights are often linked to contentious politics of struggle”, as described by Nicole J. Wilson, Leila M. Harris, Joanne Nelson, and Sameer H. Shah [20]. The human right to water has progressed from its days as an “emergent right”, but still lacks enforceability [21]. It must also be noted that this article is devoted to consideration of international law as it affects the human right to water in contexts of statelessness and displacement, and an analysis of transboundary groundwater usage, albeit a critical subject, is beyond the scope of this article.