Worster 205 large numbers of stateless, with, for example, Sweden, having a stateless population of 36,000. The Middle East is also home to large numbers of stateless persons. Syria has approximately 160,000, while Kuwait has 93,000, Saudi Arabia has 70,000, and Iraq has almost 50,000. While the migration of individuals in de jure and de facto stateless situations is a significant problem, this paper will focus on cases throughout the world where children are being born without a nationality. Most of these situations of statelessness at birth come about from a variety of causes, ranging from the application of exclusive jus sanguinis laws to issues of state succession, and can be cured with a multipronged approach. This paper will only address solutions for child statelessness at birth by extending the application of nationality law, not other solutions such as expanded birth registration or regularization of older individuals. This paper will also examine the legal obligations on states only, and will not address methods for ensuring violations of legal obligations are remedied.2 Specifically, it will locate in various treaties the obligation to grant nationality to a child born in a state and will examine whether it is possible, under current treaty law, to identify the state that bears the obligation to extend its nationality to the stateless child. If every state with a stateless population, bearing this duty, extended its nationality in this manner, a significant amount of stateless situations would begin to be resolved. This paper will survey the field of treaties that govern statelessness or protect the right to a nationality, and determine how, through the various instruments, identifiable states have this obligation. It will consider both universal treaties, such as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR),3 and the Convention on the Rights of the Child,4 as well as regional treaties. Based on this survey, it will demonstrate that through multiple overlapping treaties, most states must grant nationality to children born in their territory if they would be otherwise stateless. 2 International Treaties This study will begin with treaties of a universal character governing statelessness, before secondly considering regional treaties. Universal treaties concerning statelessness are relevant for several reasons. Some treaties directly pertain to statelessness. Others provide for a right to nationality, yet it is often difficult to identify the state that is responsible for granting nationality. Also, there are treaties that specially provide protections for children, including protections for either statelessness or nationality. These universal instruments already cover a significant number of the states in the world. The first class of treaties is those that specifically concern statelessness, the 1954 and 1961 Statelessness Conventions.5 The objective of these treaties was to reduce cases of statelessness,6 for example, the 1951 Convention requires states to facilitate naturalization of stateless persons.7 More important for this article is the 1961 Convention that requires states to grant their nationality to children born in their territory who would otherwise be stateless.8 Unfortunately, this convention does not have universal adherence, whether by signature and ratification, accession or succession to the treaty.9 A number of states have recently adhered 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Admittedly, even with rules in place, states may violate those rules. There are numerous studies documenting state violations of international law regarding statelessness. See, e.g., Gerard-René de Groot, Katja Swider, Olivier Vonk, ‘Practices and Approaches in EU Member States to Prevent and End Statelessness’ (Study for the LIBE Committee, Eur. Parl. Doc. PE 536.47628-29,2015) <http:// www.europarl.europa.eu/thinktank/en/document.html?reference=IPOL_STU(2015)536476> accessed 7 May 2019; Also see Carol Batchelor, ‘Statelessness And The Problem Of Resolving Nationality Status’ (1998) 10 International Journal of Refugee Law, (“International instruments, of course, cannot actually grant the nationality to which a given individual may have a claim, or make nationality effective.”). See International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (Dec 19 1966) 999 UNTS 171 (ICCPR). See Convention on the Rights of the Child (Nov 20 1989) 1577 UNTS 3 (CRC). See 1954 Statelessness Convention; 1961 Statelessness Convention. See ILC, ‘Report of the International Law Commission Covering the Work of its Fifth Session’ (1 June – 14 August 1953) UN Doc A/2456, para 134 (discussing assignment of nationality to stateless children under the stateless conventions based on birth in the state’s territory). See 1954 Stateless Convention, art 32. See 1961 Statelessness Convention at art 1(1) (“A Contracting State shall grant its nationality to a person born in its territory who would otherwise be stateless.”); UN Human Rights Council, ‘Report of the Secretary-General on Human rights and arbitrary deprivation of nationality’ (2011) UN Doc A/HRC/19/43, para. 4; However, the 1961 Statelessness Convention does permit a state to require an application in order to grant nationality in this scenario, rather than simply receiving nationality by operation of law, see 1961 Statelessness Convention, art 1(1)(b). See Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness (30 August 1961) 989 UNTS 175 (documenting 73 states party to the Convention).