Perhaps another way to perceive root causes of statelessness, is to question if there has been a collective failure at all levels – UN, state, civil society – to do what we are obliged to, by law, by institutional mandate and by our basic humanity. 4. We must challenge the perceived tension between state sovereignty and the right to a nationality At the heart of many debates, is the perceived tension between the states right to decide who belongs, and the human right of every person to a nationality. Minorities often are at the fault-line of this debate. they do not belong here, because they are from there. I offer two thoughts: 1. States exercise their sovereignty when they accede to international treaties, participate as member states of the UN and incorporate international norms into domestic law. This is not a clash, but a reinforcement. And so, perhaps this tension is an illusion – a lazy argument that has run its course. 2. Even where there may be a tension, it is only in a few fundamental ways that international law limits how a state may shape its nationality law. For example, rules of belonging should not be discriminatory. This basic principle, we all should be able to agree, benefits us all. Ultimately, we can imagine a more inclusive future. The problem of statelessness is solveable, and the benefits – to individuals, minorities and states - of solving it are immense. I commend the Special Rapporteur for drawing our attention to this important issue. It is up to us to collectively ensure that every person’s right to a nationality is respected, protected and fulfilled. Thank you.