This perceived lack of belonging within the Kuwaiti nation-state was reinforced following the withdrawal of Iraqi troops from Kuwait in 1990, when the Bidoon were accused of assisting the Iraqis and those Bidoon who had fled were not able to return. With regard to how the government have framed this situation, it has been noted that: “The term Bidoon is best described as a construction of the Kuwaiti Government, members of this group are not part of it voluntarily. On the contrary, membership of the Bidoon is unintentional and unwanted. Over time, it has developed into a classification forced upon its members. Today, this construction by the Kuwaiti Government is used to marginalise and oppress the Bidoon.”17 The Bidoon were therefore created, and these excluded persons and their descendants still live with the dire consequences of this exclusion. Their legal limbo is justified as they are seen as a threat to the ‘homogenous’ Kuwaiti nation-state and are often accused of being foreign infiltrators who are trying to benefit from this rentier state. This exclusion has been challenged by the Bidoon in the recent socio-political turmoil in the region. Whereas the two previous example populations were rendered stateless due to a perception of their lack of belonging/loyalty to the state, the Bidoon of Kuwait have been framed as disloyal only decades after the rendering of the population stateless. Their statelessness was a result of poorly implemented registration; their persecution however is socially constructed as a means to reinforce what it means to be ‘Kuwaiti’, i.e. not Bidoon. Since 2011 the contestation of their status has been more vocal, with mass demonstrations by the population and in response by the government mass arrests and suppression of the protestors. However, as a consequence the authorities did agree, in theory, to naturalize some of the Bidoon (including those who are the children of Kuwaiti mothers and those who have served in the Kuwait army and police).18 This shows the expansion of the boundaries of citizenship to those who are perceived as loyal either through maternal affiliation or services to the state. While the outcome of these statements has made little difference in terms of resolving the statelessness of the Bidoon, it does show the potential of possible acceptance that they are in fact ‘Kuwaiti’ because the disloyalty argument seems to be losing tractability with increased protests demanding recognition of their belonging in Kuwait. In the case of the Bidoon this is in response to the increased instability they are causing through their demand to be recognised as Kuwaiti. The example of Syria is particularly interesting as it shows the same group of people being Affleck, D., 2012, Being ‘Without’- Who are the Bidon of Kuwait?, Right Now, http://rightnow.org.au/topics/asylum-seekers/being-%E2%80%9Cwithout%E2%80%9D%E2%80%93-who-are-the-bidoon-of-kuwait/ 17 Al Barazi, Z., 2012, The Bidoon: a solution insight?, Statelessness Programme, http://statelessprog.blogspot.co.uk/2012/03/bidoon-solution-in-sight.html 18 -6Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2376426