Abstract
In the discipline of international relations, borders as one understands today, is associated with modernity and particularly the birth of the Westphalian state. Strictly anchored in the strategic and utilitarian logic and necessity, border largely remained the sensitive and sovereign limits of the state that is to be religiously preserved and protected. Over the course of time, the scholarship in border studies evolved from an ancillary area of academic interest within the disciplines of geography and history to a domain of interdisciplinary knowledge. It is marked by a significant shift in the understanding of borders. Borders are no longer identified as geometries of strategic significance, rather as a dynamic process in itself. It is in this shift in discourse that the chapter attempts to situate the Sino-Indian border of Tawang, anchoring it in its historical and contextual matrix.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Agnew, John. 1994. The Territorial Trap: The Geographical Assumptions of International Theory. Review of International Political Economy.
Anuja, Atul. 2017. China Shifts Focus on “Eastern sector” As the Core of Border Row with India. The Hindu, dated 3rd March, 2017.
Arpi, Claude. 2013. 1962 and the McMahon Line Saga. USA: Lancer Publishers.
Buzan, Barry, Richard Little. 2001. Why International Relations has Failed as an Intellectual Project and What to Do about It? Millenium: Journal of International Studies 30 (1): 19–39.
China Destroys 30,000 ‘Incorrect’ World Maps, The Hindu dated 26th March, 2019.
Goswami, Namrata. 2012. China’s Territorial Claims on Arunachal Pradesh; Alternative Scenarios 2032, IDSA Occasional Paper No. 29, Lancer’s Books, New Delhi.
Hartshorne, Richard. 1950. The Functional Approach in Political Geography. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 40.
Havlicek, T., Jerabek M.,and Dokoupil, J. (ed). Borders in Central Europe after the Schengen Agreement. Springer
Houtum, H. van. 2005. The Geopolitics of Borders and Boundaries. Geopolitics 10.
Joshi, Manoj. 2002. India China Agree to Exchange Border Maps. Times of India, 31st March, 2002.
Joshi, Manoj. 2018. India’s So-Called New Policy on Tibet is Neither New Nor Effective. https://scroll.in/article/826269/indias-so-called-new-policy-on-tibet-is-neither-new-nor-effective.
Katherine, Richards. 2015. China-India: An Analysis of the Himalayan Territorial Dispute. Source: https://www.defence.gov.au/ADC/Publications/IndoPac/Richards%20final%20IPSD%20paper.pdf.
Kolossov, Vladimir. 2005. Border Studies: Changing Perspectives and Theoretical Approaches. Geopolitics 10: 606–632.
Kolossov, A. Vladimir. 2015. Theoretical Approaches in the Study of Borders (Chapter 1.2). In Introduction to Border Studies, ed. V. Laine Sevastianov, Laine Sergei. P., Jussi and Kireev A. Anton, 33–56. Vladivostok: Dalnauka.
Kramsch, Olivier. 2010. Regulating European Borders: A Cultural Perspective. In Innovative Regulatory Approaches: Coping with Scandinavian and European Policies, ed. N. Veggeland. New York: Nova Science Publishers.
Kristof. D.K. Ladis. 1959 September. The Nature of Frontiers and Boundaries. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 49 (3) (Part I): 269–282.
Laine, P. Jussi. 2015. A Historical View on the Study of Borders (Chapter 1.1). In Introduction to Border Studies,. ed. V. Laine Sevastianov, Laine Sergei, P. Jussi and Kireev A. Anton, 14–32. Vladivostok: Dalnauka.
Lefebvre, Henri. 1974. La production de l’espace. Paris: Anthropos.
MacKinder, Halford. 1904. The Geographical Pivot of History. Geographi-cal Journal 23: 421–44.
Mackinder, Harold J. 1996. Democratic Ideals and Reality: A Study in the Politics of Reconstruction. Washington D.C.
Management of Indo-China Border. Ministry of External Affairs https://mha.gov.in/sites/default/files/INDO%20CHINA_05052017.pdf.
Nail, Thomas. 2016. Theory of the Border. USA: Oxford University Press.
Newman, David. 1999. Boundaries, Territory and Postmodernity. Abingdon: Frank Cass (Taylor & Francis).
Noorani, A.G. 2008, October 24. Maps and Borders, Frontline.
Paasi, Anssi. 2005. Generations and the Development of Border Studies. Geopolitics 10: 663–671.
Paasi, Anssi. 2011. A ‘Border theory’: An Unattainable Dream or a Realistic Aim for Border Scholars? In A Research Companion to Border Studies, ed. Doris Wastl-Walter. Doris: Aldershot, Ashgate.
Ratzel, Friedrich. 1903. Politische geographie: Oder die geographie der staaten, des verkehres und des krieges. Oldenbourg: Munich.
Reid, Robert. 1942. History of the Frontier Areas Bordering on Assam from 1883–1941. Guwahati: Assam Government Press.
Schendel, Willems van. 2004. The Bengal Borderland: Beyond State and Nation in South Asia. Anthem Press.
Scott, James and Kolossov Vladimir. 2013. Selected Conceptual Issues in Border Studies. https://belgeo.revues.org/10532.
Strandsbjerg, Jeppe and Jochen Kleinschmidt. 2010. After Critical Geopolitics: Why Spatial IR Theorizing Needs More Social Theory at https://www.researchgate.net/publication/268802101_After_Critical_Geopolitics_Why_Spatial_IR_Theorizing_Needs_More_Social_Theory.
Tsing, Anna. 2003 Nov. 29–Dec. 5. Natural Resources and Capitalist Frontiers. Economic and Political Weekly 38 (48): 5100–5106.
Tweed, D. 2018. China’s Territorial Disputes. Bloomberg. As updated on October 4, 2018. https://www.bloomberg.com/quicktake/territorialdisputes
Vasquez, John A. 1995. Why Do Neighbors Fight? Proximity, Interaction, or Territoriality. Journal of Peace Research 32 (3): 277–93.
Vaughan-Williams, Nick, and Border Politics. 2009. The Limits of Sovereign Power. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Whittermore, S. 1940. Boggs, International Boundaries: A Study of Boundary Functions and Problems. New York: Columbia University Press.
Wiegand, E. 2011. Krista, Enduring Territorial Disputes: Strategies of Bargaining. Coercive Diplomacy and Settlement: University of Georgia Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Ajin, S. (2020). Situating the Sino-Indian Border of Tawang in the Border Studies Discourse. In: Mayilvaganan, M., Khatoon, N., Bej, S. (eds) Tawang, Monpas and Tibetan Buddhism in Transition. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-4346-3_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-4346-3_2
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-15-4345-6
Online ISBN: 978-981-15-4346-3
eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)