2021 Statelessness & Citizenship Review 3(1) Yet, international law on statelessness and citizenship utterly overlooks the importance of (de)colonial legacies. 24 Both the 1954 Convention Relating to the Status of Stateless Persons and the 1961 Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness (‘Statelessness Conventions’) are based on the premises that statelessness is principally due to a conflict of nationality laws, arbitrary deprivation of nationality or gender-based discrimination, but disregard the largescale impact of colonialism in creating statelessness. 25 In this regard, TWAIL offer a valuable standpoint in deconstructing the colonial features and effects of international law. 26 Through a critical legal analysis, TWAIL scholars seek to challenge the supposedly ‘universality’ of international law and demonstrate how the international legal framework perpetuate unequal power relations. Notably, TWAIL scholarship questions the premises that international human rights law instruments are emancipatory. Rather, they emerge as Eurocentric projects, exclusively drafted by wealthy powerful nations, in an attempt to reinforce the dominance of the ‘Global North’ over the ‘Global South’, and the subordination of non-Europeans to Europeans. 27 In doing so, TWAIL scholars notably rely on a critical historical perspective on the foundations of international law. Against this background, this article aims at filling the existing research gap by exploring Syrian nationality legislation and statelessness through an anti-colonial perspective. This paper builds upon TWAIL scholarship in an effort to deconstruct and uncover the hidden colonial features of Syrian citizenship. Ultimately, this paper argues that discriminatory provisions in Syrian nationality laws and the resulting risk of statelessness bear the legacies of European colonialism and hegemony. This analysis starts first by offering a historical context on the colonial history and formation of Syria as a modern nation-State. The following Part exposes the colonial responsibility in introducing gender-based discrimination in Syrian citizenship, and in depriving the Kurds and Palestinians from their right to self-determination. Part V explores arbitrary deprivation of nationality in Syria as an act inspired by European practices. Finally, this paper ends with concluding thoughts, summarising the main findings and calling for the value of an anticolonial analysis of citizenship. 24 25 26 27 Malak Benslama-Dabdoub, ‘Decolonising Statelessness: Unpacking Colonial Legacies and Deconstructing Forms of Epistemic Violence’, CSS Blog, University of Melbourne (Blog Post, January 2021) <https://law.unimelb.edu.au/centres/statelessness/critical-statelessnessstudies-blog/decolonising-statelessness-unpacking-colonial-legacies-and-deconstructingforms-of-epistemic-violence>. See Convention Relating to the Status of Stateless Persons, opened for signature 28 September 1954, 360 UNTS 117 (entered into force 6 June 1960); Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness, opened for signature 30 August 1961, 989 UNTS 185 (entered into force 13 December 1975). James Thuo Gathii, ‘Rejoinder: TWAILing International Law’ (1999) 98(6) Michigan Law Review 2066; Makau Mutua and Antony Anghie, ‘What is TWAIL?’ [2000] 94 Proceedings of the Annual Meeting (The American Society of International Law) 31; Obiora Chinedu Okafor, 'Critical Third World Approaches to International Law (TWAIL): Theory, Methodology, or Both?’ (2008) 10(4) International Community Law Review 371; Luis Eslava and Sundhya Pahuja, ‘Between Resistance and Reform: TWAIL and the Universality of International Law’ (2011) 3(1) Trade, Law and Development 103; Luis Eslava and Sundhya Pahuja, ‘Beyond the (Post) Colonial: TWAIL and the Everyday Life of International Law’ (2012) 45(2) Verfassung und Recht in Übersee/Law and Politics in Africa, Asia and Latin America 195. Ratna Kapur, Gender, Alterity and Human Rights: Freedom in a Fishbowl (Edward Elgar Publishing 2018). 10