236 Stateless Syrians in Turkey and Lebanon The registration of the Syrians in Turkey has sometimes caused a delay due to the intensity of registry processes previously done by the safety units, while the thought of the Arabic-speaking staff being not enough have raised immigrants’ concerns about expressing themselves and reduced their application. Similarly, the Syrian records done by the neighborhood local authorities show that the theory is really different from the truth in practice. It is quite common for Syrians who are outside of the camp in Turkey to stay in the same house as a 4-5 family, while the registries of local authorities may have a family record per household. The fact that the nomadic groups in Syria (Doms) are culturally far from the record systems affect their lives in Turkey. Those Doms who do not want to be registered are continuing to be an important source in the increase of informality in Turkey (Mutlu et al., 2016, p. 33). This causes unregistered de facto statelessness to be concentrated in some groups. There is a need to draw attention to some points. The first of these is that babies are not visible because the process of registering newborn children is not known, or the need for it is not understood. In this respect, both the records kept by the State and the lack of basic rights in the process of statelessness phenomenon are emerging together. In this respect, moreover, becoming both unregistered and statelessness allow people to face a risk of “double victimisation”. At this point, the persons are defined with a cold title “Syrian”, which reduces them to only verbal level. The Stateless Syrians in Lebanon and Politicization of Numbers In the acceptation and hosting of most foreigners (refugees and non-refugees) per capita, Lebanon is one of the World’s leading countries. For this reason, the situation arising from a legal deficiency in guaranteeing the rights of refugees while managing and hosting the migration, which brings the country in an important international position, causes many more important problems in the country. The Lebanon government adopted an “open-door” policy against the Syrian crisis, which occurred in 2011, and allowed 1.5 million Syrians to cross the country. However, by 2014, the Lebanon government has decided to change the open-door policy that it had previously adopted and restricted the Syrians to access to basic services. In addition, from the end of 2014, the Lebanese government attempted to take limiting measures against Syrians although previously accepted with open door policy. In May 2015, Lebanese officials asked UNHCR to stop the records of Syrian migrants. Especially between the years 2016-2018, the policy towards Syrians was very radical and the immigrants in the country began to be seen as the main cause of instability, unemployment, and disruptions in institutions. This led to Foreign Minister Gebran Bassil’s call for the return of Syrians and he said that the UN should not prevent the return of Syrians. Subsequently, it became mandatory to renew the residence permits in every 6 months, and persons became deprived of the rights of legal work. In addition, it is not legally arranged to benefit from education, travel and health services for Syrians and their children. Instead, the provision of these rights and the coordination of other necessary services were fully transferred to the ruling political party and local municipalities, which can significantly affect the size and process of the decisions (Geha, 2018, p. 1-2). The religious distribution rate of the population, which develops a close relationship with the sharing of political power in Lebanon, still shows its effect. The main reason why Christian groups are brought forward and emphasised in this way is to ensure the political majority in Lebanon and to achieve political power (Maktabi, 1998, p. 240). However, even if the politicisation of the numbers ensures a power share within itself, the result often allows the production of those remaining outside. This offers a backdrop to the ongoing debate in Lebanon in the long run. While the socio-political structure of Lebanon increases the tendency of polarisation within itself, this BORDER CROSSING