The State, Transborder Movements, and Deterritorialised Identity in South Asia

  • Nasir UddinEmail author


The state, border and people’s mobility have an intimate but a complex relation in globalised world because the states’ roles become catalysts in making people mobile across borders. The states produce borders as much as borders reproduce the states in terms of territoriality, while “deterritorialisation” features the contemporary globalised world. Therefore, transborder movement, that denotes mobility of people across borders, has become an inescapable part of modern state system as “the notion of intensification of globalization,” as borders both separate and connect states. Borders are dynamic and dyadic in the interface of state and non-state actors involved in border making and in its operations. The transborder movement becomes a complex web when the states deal with the mobility as an issue of national/regional security, legal/illegal trades, growing militancy, terrorisation of regions and the questions of citizenship. The chapter discusses growing trends of transborder mobility in this region since South Asian states could be ideal cases to understand such dynamic and dialectical relations between transborder movements and the states. It unfolds that transborder movement is also deeply entangled with the retaining, regaining and transforming identity in deterritorialised global landscape. Therefore, the nexus between transborder movements and deterritorialised identity demands serious academic attentions and the deep analysis with empirically grounded and contextually rooted cases.

This chapter intends to focus the ways how borders and transborder movements are dealt with from strategic and diplomatic points of view in South Asian states; how borders become spaces for people to move from one state to another in search of a better fortune (economic migrants), escaping persecution (refugees) and finding a disaster-free living place (climate migrants); how the states in South Asia address transborder movements at both policy level and practical fields; how borders are used for illegal trades and informal economy in South Asian states; how refugee issues, illegal migrations, citizenship issues and camp/stranded people are dealt with in South Asian states as consequences of transborder movement; and how the notions of territoriality of statehood become blurred due to the increasing transborder movements in South Asia. Its lens also flashes out on the dynamics of identity in the interface of territoriality, deterritoriality and mobility of people across borders particularly in South Asia.


(Trans)Border State Mobility Identity Deterritoriality South Asia 


  1. Agamben, Giorgia. (1998). Homo Sacer: Sovereign power and bare life (D. Heller-Roazen, Trans.). Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Agnew, J. (2008). Borders on the mind: Re-framing border thinking. Ethics & Global Politics, 1(4), 175–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Appadurai, A. (1997). Modernity at large: Cultural dimensions in globalization. Minnesota: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  4. Appadurai, A. (1990). Disjuncture and difference in the global cultural economy. Theory, Culture, Society, 7, 295–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Arendt, H. (1994). The origins of totalitarianism. New York: Harcourt Books.Google Scholar
  6. Balibar, E. (2010). At the borders of citizenship: A democracy in translation? European Journal of Social Theory, 13(3), 315–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bose, S., & Jalal, A. (2004). Modern South Asia: History, culture and political economy. London/New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brettell, C., & Hollifield, J. (Eds.). (2014). Migration theory crossing across discipline. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  9. Hannerz, U. (1996). Transnational connections: Culture, people, places. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  10. Hernàndez Marti, G. (2006). The Deterritorialization of cultural heritage in a globalized modernity. Transfer: Journal of Contemporary Culture, November, 91–106.Google Scholar
  11. Hirsch, R. (2016). Climate migrants: On the move in a warming world. Washington, DC: Twienty First Century Book.Google Scholar
  12. Jackson, J. B. (1987). “The word itself” in Discovering the Vernacular Landscape, 13. Accessed on 7 June 2018.
  13. Khan, Y. (2007). The great partition: The making of India and Pakistan. New Heaven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Kumaraswamy, P. R., & Copland, I. (Eds.). (2009). South Asia: The spectre of terrorism. New Delhi: Routledge.Google Scholar
  15. Mann, M. (2015). South Asia’s modern history: Thematic perspective. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  16. Newman, D. (2003). On borders and power: A theoretical framework. Journal of Borderlands Studies, 18(1), 13–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Nugent, W. (1992). Crossing: The great transatlantic migration, 1870–1914. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Offe, C. (1998). Homogeneity and constitutional democracy: Coping with identity conflicts through group rights. Journal of Political Philosophy, 6(2), 113–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Pandey, G. (2004). Remembering partition: Violence, nationalism and history in India. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Passi, A. (2009). Bounded spaces in a ‘borderless world’: Border studies, power and the anatomy of territory. Journal of Power, 2(9), 213–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Ranciere, J. (2004). “Who is the subject off the rights of man?” The south. Asian Quaterly, 103(2/3), 297–310.Google Scholar
  22. Randeria, S. (2007). The State of globalization legal plurality, overlapping sovereignties and ambiguous alliances between civil society and the cunning state in India. Theory, Culture and Globalization, 24(01), 1–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Robertson, R. (1992). Globalization: Social theory and global culture. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  24. Sassen, S. (2000). New frontiers facing urban sociology at the Millenium. British Journal of Sociology, 51(1), 143–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Scott, J. (2010). The art of not being governed: An acharchist history of upland Southeast Asia. New Heaven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Seyhan, A. (2001). Writing outside the nation. Princeton/Oxford: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Shastri, A. (2001). The post-colonial states in South Asia: Decmocracy, identity, develoment, and security. In A. Shastri & J. Wilson (Eds.), The post-colonial states in South Asia: Decmocracy, identity, develoment, and security (pp. 1–13). London/New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Soysal, Y. N. (2000). Citizenship and identity in post war Europe. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 23(1), 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Taran, P., et al. (2009). Economic migration, social cohesion and development: Towards an integrated approach. Strasbourg: Council of Europe.Google Scholar
  30. Tomlinson, J. (1999). Globalization and culture. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  31. Triandafyllidou, A. (2013). Circular migration between Europe and its neighbourhood: Choice or necessity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Turner, J. C. (2005). Explaining the nature of power: A three- process theory. European Journal of Social Psychology, 35(1), 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Uddin, N. (2012). Introduction: Anthropology in South Asia. Man in India, 91(01), i–iv.Google Scholar
  34. Uddin, N. (2018). The state matters: The Rohingyas in home state and host state. An Unpublished Research monograph.Google Scholar
  35. Uddin, N. (2019 [Forthcoming]). The Rohingyas: A case of “Subhuman”. Delhi: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  36. Van Houtum, H. (2011). The mask of the border. In D. Wastl-Walter (Ed.), The Ashgate research companion to border studies (pp. 49–61). Farnham: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  37. Vila, P. (Ed.). (2003). Ethnography of border. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  38. Webb, M. J. (2015). Greed, Grievance and Violent Separatism in South Asia. In M. J. Webb & A. Wijeweera (Eds.), The political economy of conflict in South Asia (pp. 149–170). New York: Palgrave McMillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Webb, M., & Wijeweera, A. (2015). Introduction. In M. J. Webb & A. Wijeweera (Eds.), The political economy of conflict in South Asia (pp. 1–11). New York: Palgrave McMillan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Wetherly, P. (2005). Marxism and the state: An analytical approach. New York: Palgrave McMillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. White-Spunner, B. (2017). Partition: The story of Indian independence and the creation of Pakistan in 1947. Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of AnthropologyUniversity of ChittagongChittagongBangladesh

Personalised recommendations