Abstract
Since 2014, Western states have been enacting reactionary policies to strip citizenship from people who are labelled a threat to national security. The action of denationalising perceived security risks is a knee-jerk response to the growing number of terrorist attacks occurring in Western states and the threat posed by returning foreign terrorist fighters. What amounts to the exportation of security threats, however, presents a new quagmire relating to state sovereignty and international security. Unfortunately, momentum to proactively create more exclusionary policies is spreading in Western countries with a protectionist prerogative that counters previous international conventions. This paper seeks to illustrate the risk that these citizenship-stripping policies pose to peacebuilding and international relations. The findings of the research for this article suggest that although sovereignty is the basis of the international system, the lack of unilateral consensus on citizenship in counterterrorism policy has highlighted a gap in international law that inherently weakens peacebuilding initiatives.
Keywords
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
