38.2 (7) TEMPROSA.DOCX38.2 (7) TEMPROSA.DOCX (DO NOT DELETE) 284 BERKELEY JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL LAW 1/16/2021 12:59 PM [Vol. 38:2 terrorism, 293 the maintenance of international security, 294 and sovereignty that often leads to discrimination. 295 States consider such interests in the determination of statelessness. Statelessness in the Resulting Rhetoric of Naming and Categorizations The ideographic character of statelessness and the underlying ideologies of statelessness identification have several consequences. Firstly, statelessness has become a naming device of international law; States exercise a naming function in statelessness determinations through the "stateless" label. In critical rhetoric, naming plays an interpretive role in assessing what is perceived to be true at the moment. Through naming, one fixes and asserts a relationship to that which is named. 296 Labelling, in the words of Geof Wood, refers to "a relationship of power in that the labels of some are more easily imposed on people and situations than those of others . . . [and] is therefore an act of politics involving conflict as well as authority." 297 Labels proliferate with the development of the international migration regime. Governments form, transform, and politicize labels. 298 In the arguments around statelessness, competing policy discourses are evident in how States use available means of persuasion (mainly grounded in law and within the wide discretion that international law's definition allows) to declare or constitute stateless status. States appear more willing to use domestic law to make stateless status determinations in the absence of prescribed rules of international law. States also incorporate policy-determined factors for inclusion or exclusion, such as lawful stay, actions of the applicant, and other links to the determining State. 293. See Shiva Jayaraman, International Terrorism and Statelessness: Revoking the Citizenship of ISIL Foreign Fighters 17(1) CHI. J. INT'L L. 178 (2016). 294. For a discussion of statelessness in the context of international security in the Security Council, see Valeria Bello, Is the Discussion of 'Statelessness' in the UN Security Council a Question of Human Security or International Security? (2014), https://gcm.unu.edu/publications/policy-reports/isthe-discussion-of-statelessness-in-the-un-security-council-a-question-of-human-security-or-international-security.html (last visited May 6, 2019). 295. See van Waas & Jaghai, supra note 261, at 413 ("As nationality revocation gains new attention from states as a tool to counter terrorism . . . the reality that this measure often applies only to particular sub-groups of citizens demands closer scrutiny."). See also J. M. Spectar, To Ban or Not to Ban an American Taliban - Revocation of Citizenship & (and) Statelessness in a Statecentric System, 39 CAL. W. L. REV. 263 (2003); Volpp, supra note 258. International law does allow the exclusion of the benefits of the 1954 Statelessness Convention on certain grounds in Article 1(2). However, the current definition of statelessness lends to constructivist critiques. Some States are also anticipating new loss of territory due to the impending effects of climate change and its impact of statelessness. See Abhimanyu George Jain, The 21st Century Atlantis: The International Law of Statehood and Climate Change-Induced Loss of Territory, 50 STAN. J. INT'L L. 1 (2014). 296. McKerrow, supra note 143, at 236. 297. Geof Wood, The Politics of Development Policy Labelling, 16 DEV. & CHANGE 347 (1985). 298. See generally Roger Zetter, More Labels, Fewer Refugees: Remaking the Refugee Label in an Era of Globalization, 20(2) J. REFUGEE STUD. 172 (2007).