Introduction 5 within liberal States. In reality, though, some individuals are excluded from human rights frameworks, often because a duty-holder is not adequately desig nated. The noncitizen claims examined in this book are not general. They are special obligations, generated from the special relationship of noncitizenship. As such, the obligations are assigned, even if sometimes they are shared between States. In order to ensure everyone’s rights are secured, this book will address the logics of expulsion directly – and the logics of both hyphenated noncitizenship and unhyphenated noncitizenship. People do not only relate to States from within their borders, and an individual may relate with a particular State in several ways. Noncitizenship provides a mechanism by which to examine the continuity between various sites of engagement. Today, then, those in noncitizen relationships with powerful States, wherever they live, may have to fight to be taken into account, even conceptually.14 This arises at the level of theory and it will need to be addressed at this level. At the time of writing, the discourse of fear is increasingly common in popular and policy debate in States built upon liberal democratic norms, and security concerns are used to justify increasing exclusions and expulsions.15 This book does not rule out exclusions but argues that discrimination and expulsion cannot be the default. Noncitizens are not anathema to a liberal political framework (on both State and global levels), but are fundamental to it. Noncitizens are in a special relationship with States and have claims upon them as a result. Noncitizens and their claims become challenging when their reality goes unacknowledged or is inappropriately activated. This book, then, identifies a theoretical problem with significant realworld implications that urgently need to be addressed. Rather than start from and then qualify an ideal theory, this book begins from the world as it is now and draws attention to a form of relationship that really exists, albeit ignored. On the one hand, it builds upon the theoretical approach of Phillip Cole, who warns that liberal theory as we know it is necessarily an ‘insider theory’, constructed by and for those on the inside of it, who are then blinded to realities outside a framework that is serving them well.16 On the other hand, it develops a historical approach, examining deeply problematic elements of the roots of contemporary liberal political philosophy and considering how to move away from them. This includes the role of key liberal theorists in the 13 13 Benhabib 2004 ibid.; David Weissbrodt (2008) the Human Rights of Non-citizens, Oxford Uni versity Press. See also, for example, Laura van Waas and Amal de Chickera (2017) ‘Unpacking Statelessness’, in Tendayi Bloom, Katherine Tonkiss and Phillip Cole (eds) (2017) Understand ing Statelessness, Routledge. 14 This problem for liberalism was already famously pointed out by Hannah Arendt. 15 Valeria Bello (2017) International Migration and International Security: Why Prejudice Is a Global Security Threat, Routledge. 16 Phillip Cole (2017) ‘Insider Theory and the Construction of Statelessness’ in Tendayi Bloom, Kath erine Tonkiss and Phillip Cole (eds) (2017) Understanding Statelessness, Routledge. An important aspect of this is who is able to be heard within the dominant discourses; see for example, Anke Graness (2015) ‘Is the Debate on “Global Justice” a Global One? Some Considerations in View of Modern Philosophy in Africa’, pp. 126–140 in Journal of Global Ethics 11(1).