Skip to main content

Introduction

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Border Politics

Abstract

The fall of the Iron Curtain in 1989, was heralded by many authors (Ohmae 1995; Shapiro and Alker 1996 and others) as the beginning of a new borderless age. Impressed by the speed of economic globalization, the rapid spread of communication networks, and the increase of affordable international mass transportation, they assumed the end of the world as we knew it and the beginning of a global liberal era. However, despite the proliferation of international institutions and organizations as well as transnational networks of non-state actors, borders remain a prominent fixture of the post Cold War era. Borders have not disappeared, they are still a reality on maps and a physical experience at security checks and passport controls (Rumford 2006: 156), but they have become more diffuse, turning whole territories into borderlands (Balibar in Rumford 2006). While globalization might have seriously changed the consciousness of borders in the global North, where ‘borders are being both multiplied and reduced in their localization and their function, they are being thinned out and doubled’ (Ibid.: 156); in many parts of the South borders have always held a different meaning. In many regions state borders have reflected European powers’ attempts to transform and organize the world by exporting their own conceptions of state and borders. Balibar and Williams (v) speak of the construction of ‘another Europe’ which was never really achieved. Most of the territories that gained independence and became sovereign states, represented in the international arena, were hardly unified or homogeneous nation states (Balibar and Williams 2002: 75). In most cases the entities that gained independence were traditional units, created and constructed by their colonizers, some with scant regard to realities on the ground, often driving extended families and ethnicities apart. In many parts of the South, cross-border migration and movements are an everyday practice of people living in borderlands, reducing the meaning of borders to little more than demarcation lines on maps.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 99.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Agnew, J. (1994). The territorial trap: The geographical assumptions of international relations theory. Review of International Political Economy, 1(1), 53–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Agnew, J. (2008). Borders on the mind: Re-framing border thinking. Ethics & Global Politics. Retrieved from http://www.ethicsandglobalpolitics.net/index.php/egp/article/view/1892

  • Anderson, B. (1983). Imagined communities: Reflections on the origins and spread of nationalism. New York: Verso.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andreas, P. (2003). Redrawing the line: Borders and security in the twenty-first century. International Security, 28(2), 78–111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anzaldúa, G. (1987). Borderlands/La Frontera: The new Mestiza. San Francisco, CA: Aunt Lute Book.

    Google Scholar 

  • Badie, B. (1996). La fin des territoires. Essai sur le désordre international et l'utilité sociale du respect. Politique étrangère, 61(1), 220–221.

    Google Scholar 

  • Balibar, E., & Williams, E. M. (2002). World borders, political borders. PMLA, Special Topic: Mobile Citizens, Media States, 117(1), 71–78.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bigo, D. (2002). Security and immigration: Toward a critique of the governmentality of unease. Alternatives, 27(Special Issue), 63–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. EC, (2007/C 303/01). Retrieved from https://fra.europa.eu/sites/default/files/charter-of-fundamental-rights-of-the-european-union-2007-c_303-01_en.pdf

  • Dillon, M. (2007). Governing terror: The state of emergency of biopolitical emergence. International Political Sociology, 1(1), 7–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guild, E. (2006). The Europeanisation of Europe’s asylum policy. International Journal of Refugee Law, 18(34), 630–651.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huysmans, J. (2000). The European Union and the securitization of migration. Journal of Common Market Studies, 38(5), 751–777.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jasanoff, S. (Ed.). (2004). States of knowledge. The co-production of science and social order. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mansbach, R. (1989). The state, conceptual chaos, and the future of international relations theory. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mason, R. (2016, June 24). How did UK end up voting to leave the European Union? The Guardian. Retrieved from http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/24/how-did-uk-end-up-voting-leave-european-union

  • Minghi, J. (1963). Boundary studies in political geography. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 53, 407–428.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ohmae, K. (1995). The end of the nation-state. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paasi, A. (2005). Generations and the ‘development’ of border studies. Geopolitics, 10(4), 663–671.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prescott, V. (1965). The geography of frontiers and boundaries. London: Hutchinson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruggie, J. G. (1993). Territoriality and beyond: Problematizing modernity in international relations. International Organization, 47(1), 139–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rumford, C. (2006). Theorizing borders. European Journal of Social Theory, 9(2), 155–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shapiro, M., & Alker, H. (Eds.). (1996). Challenging boundaries: Global flows, territorial identities. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Torpey, J. (2000). The invention of the passport: Surveillance, citizenship and the state. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trump, D. (2016). Immigration reform that will make America great again. Donaldjtrump.com. Retrieved from https://www.donaldjtrump.com/positions/immigration-reform

  • Van Houtum, H. (2005). The geopolitics of borders and boundaries. Geopolitics, 10, 672–679.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Munster, R. (2009). Securitizing immigration. The politics of risk in the EU. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Vote Leave. (2016). Briefing: The EU immigration system is immoral and unfair. Vote Leave. Retrieved from http://www.voteleavetakecontrol.org/briefing_immigration

  • Weiss, C. (2015). How do science and technology affect international affairs? Minerva, 53(4), 411–430.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Witjes, N., & Olbrich, P. (forthcoming). Fragile transparency: Satellite imagery and the making of international security issues. Science and Public Policy.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Cengiz Günay .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Günay, C., Witjes, N. (2017). Introduction. In: Günay, C., Witjes, N. (eds) Border Politics. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-46855-6_1

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics