2019 Statelessness & Citizenship Review 1(1) To that end, the paper situates the issue of statelessness, which historically has been associated with interwar and post-World War II (‘WWII’) refugees, 10 within the contemporary context of neoliberal globalisation and international migration. It begins with a brief history of statelessness in global governance, before proceeding to contrast the slippery statecraft involved in the contemporary causes of statelessness with the apparent depoliticisation of the issue as it is integrated into global governance frameworks. Regarding the contemporary causes of statelessness, the paper asks: what is the relationship between neoliberal globalisation, migration management and statelessness, if any? What forms of discrimination and denationalisation are states employing, and to what end? Second, the paper looks at key international organisations and non-state actors which are considering statelessness, such as the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (‘UNHCR’) and the emergent epistemic community convened by the Institute on Statelessness and Inclusion (‘ISI’), and how each understands the problem. The final section provides examples of the depoliticised, technical language used to incorporate statelessness into the Sustainable Development Agenda (‘SDA’), New York Declaration for Refugees and Migrants (‘New York Declaration’), the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration (‘Global Compact on Migration’) and the Global Compact on Refugees. Only recently has statelessness been rediscovered as an international concern. The numbers of persons without state recognition suggest that the issue will continue to present challenges to global governance, not least because it reveals inherent contradictions in the international system of states and the human rights framework. I argue that the dominant framing of the problem as a technical, legal matter, led by UNHCR, obviates the politics behind statelessness as slippery statecraft. 11 This may lead proposed solutions to fall short of their mark and risks aggravating rights violations. Critical research on the causes of statelessness may help advocates figure out how to make the case for inclusion, appealing to broader state interests and networks, without abandoning attendant human rights obligations. In the concluding remarks, I argue for bringing the politics back in so we can see the state in statelessness and then briefly consider new frames for delivering justice and belonging to the stateless. A BRIEF HISTORY OF STATELESSNESS IN GLOBAL GOVERNANCE To understand statelessness, one starting point is its conceptual opposite: citizenship. Sociologically, citizenship is understood as a set of rights and entitlements that an individual may access through state protection; legally and politically, it refers to formal recognition by a state, or status. 12 The latter notion of citizenship as status ‘originated in the West and spread across the globe with the rise of the international system of states and the spread of colonialism’. 13 Recognition of citizenship was part of the original project of the Westphalian 10 11 12 13 Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism (Harcourt Brace Jovanovich 1973) 344. Kim Rygiel and Margaret Walton-Roberts, ‘Multiple Citizenships and Slippery Statecraft’ in Rhoda E Howard-Hassmann and Margaret Walton-Roberts (eds), The Human Right to Citizenship: A Slippery Concept (University of Pennsylvania Press 2015) 210. Audrey Macklin, ‘Who is the Citizen’s Other? Considering the Heft of Citizenship’ (2007) 8(2) Theoretical Inquiries in Law 334. Kristy Belton, Statelessness in the Caribbean: The Paradox of Belonging in the Postnational World (University of Pennsylvania Press 2017) 160. 138