Rising Statelessness Due to Disappearing Island States islanders suffer grave violations of their human rights due to degrading or inhuman conditions on submerging islands. Consequently, although there is no decided case yet regarding the disappearance of island states, it is arguable that states will refrain from returning former islanders in the future because 1) there is no territory left or 2) they are obligated under the non-refoulement principle as the disappearance of island states could trigger compelling humanitarian grounds against removal. 179 Although protection possibilities for stateless persons exist de lege lata, their effective human rights protection remains limited and will have to be assessed on a case-by-case basis in the future. Thus, whether stateless persons might enjoy protection under the Conventions on Statelessness will largely depend on the particular state they seek as refuge after they are displaced. The same applies to their protection under international human rights treaties such as the ICCPR and the ICESCR. The lack of diplomatic protection, however, offers serious consequences for stateless persons. The 1951 Refugee Convention will most likely not be applicable to displaced islanders from submerged territories. Hence, it seems that the current status of international law does not offer sufficient human rights protection for those stateless persons. VI CONCLUSION This paper has illustrated several legal problems with regard to statelessness resulting from disappearing island states. Most importantly, it is unclear whether the people affected may be considered ‘stateless people’ within the meaning of the Conventions on Statelessness and, even if they did, how far that would serve to protect their rights effectively. Legal certainty on this issue will likely become more pressing in the future. In addition, under the current international human rights regime, enforcement of the rights of both de jure as well as de facto stateless people is problematic. All of these issues are particularly pertinent to the region most likely to see an influx of people fleeing from rising sea levels. It remains to be seen how international law will deal with this global challenge in the future and whether states will find timely solutions for the protection of displaced populations. Those problems would, of course, only arise if those displaced islanders were considered stateless. With regard to the general problem of statelessness, scholars have pointed out that it is important ‘to stop statelessness “at source” by strengthening the principles governing acquisition of nationality’. 180 This might also be applicable in the case of disappearing island states. While there is no general right to a nationality that applies to every person by virtue of being human, it is worth considering adopting new rules de lege ferenda, which might help to naturalise stateless persons in the context of disappearing island states. Already existing instruments adopting such rules in the context of state succession might serve as guidance. However, while it seems easy to confer the obligation to grant nationality on the successor state, it will likely be an extremely difficult task to convince governments to confer their nationalities to stateless persons of 179 Cf Goodwin-Gill and McAdam (n 171) 289; Cf McAdam, ‘Climate Change Displacement and International Law’ (n 168). 180 Foster and Lambert (n 22) 571–72. 67