2021 Statelessness & Citizenship Review 3(1) simultaneously, how the production of statelessness itself shaped international law and the structures of international political organisation. Statelessness is often understood to have been an afterthought to the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, 5 and largely neglected by the postSecond World War (WWII) human rights framework. It has been conceptualised as an anomaly or a legal void; a state of being outside of law and politics; a term that is defined only by what it lacks — citizenship and rights. 6 This book fills up those empty spaces and, in doing so, challenges some of the assumptions that underlie these notions. Siegelberg shows how statelessness, as a concept, has always inhabited international legal thought — and has both threatened and shaped international power structures. She fills the international sphere with the agency of key thinkers and lawyers who were themselves affected by statelessness. Further, by grounding the conceptualisations of statelessness in historical events, Siegelberg shows how the international trajectory has not always been from a starting point of neglect towards ‘solving’ statelessness. Over the years, the issue has been wilfully ignored and consigned to the realms of legal fiction, sometimes conceptualised as freedom from the fetters of state laws, and latterly pragmatically displaced by political imperatives relating to statehood and self-determination. Siegelberg seamlessly weaves her story from a rich variety of sources including popular fiction, case law, works of political philosophy and correspondence between stateless persons and international organisations. She illustrates how the scope and limits of international law and political organisation that impact stateless persons today were constructed from theory, idealism, pragmatism and organisational interests. She populates her book with personalities of the past including Fridtjof Nansen, Hersch Lauterpacht, Paul Weis, Manly Hudson, Hannah Arendt and many lesser known but influential figures. She grounds the ever-shifting concepts of statelessness in their personal experiences, moral convictions and legal reasonings. As such, her narrative is cohesive and accessible to scholars from all academic fields. ‘Statelessness studies’ as a field growing from an off-shoot of refugee law, has grappled with how to grow into a more interdisciplinary space. 7 Siegelberg’s work effortlessly navigates between different academic disciplines. As such, this is a book that should become a key introductory text for statelessness scholars, and will likely serve to introduce researchers from broader disciplines to the key debates within statelessness. Chapter 1 traces how, in the aftermath of the First World War, the significance of statelessness was transformed in international politics from a ‘[s]ubject of [f]iction to a [l]egal [r]eality’. 8 The years of the First World War and the immediate aftermath saw the breakup of the Russian (Romanov), AustroHungarian (Habsburg), Prussian and Ottoman empires, shifting imperialist ideologies and thinking on subjecthood and citizenship. The fragmentation of these empires brought a new impetus to notions of statehood, statelessness and the protection of minorities and collectives. Siegelberg captures what statelessness 5 6 7 8 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, opened for signature 28 July 1951, 189 UNTS 150 (entered into force 22 April 1954). For further discussion, see, eg, William Conklin, Statelessness: The Enigma of the International Community (Hart Publishing 2014); Amal de Chickera, Unravelling Anomaly: Detention, Discrimination and the Protection Needs of Stateless Persons (Equal Right Trust 2010). Maria Jose Recalde-Vela, Sangita Jaghai-Bajulaiye and Caia Vlieks, ‘The State of Statelessness Research: 5 Years Later’ (2019) 24(2) Tilburg Law Review 139. Siegelberg (n 4) 12. 164