Dr. Maqsudul Hasan Nuri
Now that Pakistan and China have embarked upon CPEC mammoth project of nearly $54billion (now risen to almost $64bn with additional loans) early regional connectivity with immediate neighbors, Afghanistan, Iran and India is going to be crucial - if the country’s socio-economic development has to proceed meaningfully. In other words, economic and social dividends from CPEC cannot accrue unless border control and management procedures are revamped for prevention of extremism, illegal human and arms traffic, smuggling of goods and narcotics and, on the other hand, borders gainfully utilized for promoting trade, business, investment and commerce.
Not only that, it is how soon political issues with immediate neighbors are resolved and bordering areas opened up with proper monitoring and control; this can be done by striking a balance between regulation and uninterrupted socio-economic intercourse. This is despite the fact that cross-border terrorism still remains a major threat; yet both trade and opening of borders cannot wait for too long as it is no longer a binary choice. So, dealing simultaneously with both has to be done with finesse, innovation and prudence.
This essay deals with importance and background of borders; some essentially related terms; debate on positive and negative aspects of softening of borders; and finally, how best to improve border management and control techniques by keeping the option of relatively soft borders for flow of free trade and communication as envisaged by CPEC. This dialectics of control and relaxation is indeed a challenging task for policy makers. The underlying thesis is that regional integration should not be delayed in the national interest despite simmering border disputes and challenges of refugees and terrorism.
For Pakistan, economy is the Achilles heel; it is hence direly important to strive for regional connectivity and regional normalization. As a precondition, border issues need to be amicably resolved if the dividends of regionalism are to be harvested for bolstering the frail national economy.
Lately, Pak-Afghan and Pak-Iran border issues have been reflected in repeated visits of Afghan and Iranian leaders. Far from resolution, the under-currents of Pak-Afghan relations are moving ahead - very glacially yet forward ; Chinese are concerned about success of OBOR and CPEC, as the latter is not only a passageway but a blueprint for initiating regional trade and development and opening up of Chinese markets. Russians are also keen for a settlement in Afghanistan and opening up with Central Asia while Indians and Iranians may be waiting in the wings for benefiting from the project at an opportune time. The US under President Trump wants to extricate itself from the long debilitating Afghan war, following some workable settlement with Afghanistan and regional powers too.
Borders are demarcation lines that have administrative, military, fiscal, juridical and linguistic functions. One could argue that invention of the border transformed the previously indefinite, undefined and heterogeneous spaces into specific territories. While in ancient times borders changed with military conquests, loss of territory or gifts by kings, today they signify sovereign control and writ of a state for administrative purposes. They are natural or artificial but open i.e., porous or permeable and always decided by human beings at the helm of affairs; also, boundaries exist for maritime and island nations.
The term ‘boundary’ comes from ‘bounds’, it has an inward orientation. It is a broader term than ‘border’, which is a territorialized line on the ground that separates political identities, that creating an ‘inside’ and ‘outside’, an ‘interior’ and ‘exterior’. A border is a formal delimitation between two or more collective subjective entities and often has the effect of widening the geographical and mental distance between locations.
A boundary can be less formal and does not have to be material; it can be cognitive, a separating wall in the minds of people that distinguishes ‘them’ from ‘us’. Identities are produced through boundaries. Also, the term boundary does not have to relate to politics, it can also be applied to other things. For example, it is common to speak of ‘disciplinary boundaries’ in academics. So, boundaries are not limited to the border itself, but find their way into society and reproduce themselves.
The boundaries also define ‘borderlands’ and form trans-border regions. ‘Borderlands’ and trans-border regions lie in close proximity to the border. It is in these often peripheral regions that the effects of the borders are experienced, expressed in perceptions and behavior.
Besides boundaries and border there is the term ‘frontier’. Etymologically derived from ‘front’ it has a slightly more outward orientation than the previous two. In the past, a frontier was often called ‘foreland’, ‘borderland’ or ‘march.’ In this sense, borderlands can be seen as frontiers of a nation-state and create their own regions. Traditionally, borderlands and frontiers are considered as buffer zones or places between unfriendly neighbors. Boundaries are at best when they are not bothered by the border people. Within the European Union, e.g., borders had, of late, increasingly become spaces of transition and integration, shared spaces that functioned as bridges, or at least aimed at doing so.
Scholars of realistic and liberal-idealistic hue have been debating the issue of borders and their changing nature and functions in history. The realists, on their part, e.g., contend that the state system has come to stay and the hard fact is that borders represent states although their form and nature has been changing. Mass migration is seen as the singular challenge of the 21stcentury. Vocal critics of migration opine that it has become a meta-issue that will affect responses to every other challenge. This is because as mass migrations change demography, they also affect changes in host nations’ cultures and political economies. The specifics of these changes are exceedingly difficult to forecast, because they hinge on dozens of variables specific to the migrants, host nation, and scale and rate of movements.
Realists tend to take a negative view of human nature. Today, religion based fundamentalism, surging tribalism and ethnic tensions are effectively acting on the world stage. This could cede the century to more unified authoritarian powers, such as Russia and China who have drastically different value systems and views of human dignity. The pendulum has shifted from earlier benign view of migration flows which meant pluralism, diversity and attracting of foreigners thus enriching cultures.
But now, open borders philosophy is viewed darkly by realists; it is considered negatively because, like failed ideologies of the past century, it doesn’t account for the unpleasant facts about human nature and society. It is added that the truth which Communism missed was that human beings prefer self-interest to compelled altruism. As well, open border advocates mention that human societies are basically tribal in nature especially in the developing world. Moreover, rising identities and negative form of nationalism are perpetuated and profited by growing security-industrial complexes of big nations as well as powerful domestic anti-peace lobbies.
While unimpeded borders are generally recommended the trends are against open borders and advocating due checks and controls. This is so after 9/11 and especially post- 2015 when refugees and illegal migrants from Africa started swarming into Europe through the Mediterranean Sea. With President Trump’s anti-immigrant policies of erecting a Wall with Mexico to restrict migrants from south the dilemma posed is: either close the orders or make them soft, or intermediately, institute checks of filtering their flow by blocking illegal migrants, terrorists, drug and arms peddlers and human traffickers.
For countries like Pakistan with porous borders in the west, refugees and cross border militancy poses major challenges to regional connectivity in an interdependent and interconnected world. South Asia is the least integrated region of the world bedeviled by historical hostilities. Pakistan, therefore, has a high stake in the success of CPEC mega project by linking up with the region and reviving its moribund economy.
(To be continued)
(The writer is currently Visiting Faculty, Department of Defence and Strategic Studies, Quaid-i-Azam University and member Board of Governors, Area Study Center, Quaid-i-Azam University, Islamabad. He was also formerly Adviser,
COMSATS Institute of Information Technology and Ex-President, Islamabad Policy Research Institute)
