Imagined borderlands: Terrain, technology and trade in the making and managing of the China‐Myanmar border

Abstract

Building on a 'biographical' approach to national boundaries, this paper traces the history of the China-Myanmar border-its formations, disappearances and rematerializations. In doing so, it identifies three alternative imaginaries that have characterized and shaped these borderlands throughout the past one and a half century. These imaginaries-terrain, technology and tradesketch out some of the ways in which borderlands are seen, perceived and therefore acted upon by state authorities and powerful outsiders. They are central to how the boundary was demarcated, and to how it is managed today. These imaginaries, then, are reflected into specific practices-and thus have direct impact on everyday life along the China-Myanmar border. Drawing on both archival and long-term ethnographic research, this paper thus sheds light on the embedded processes of anticipation that underscore how the borderlands are envisioned today in dominant narratives centred around Belt and Road promises and fears.

The Gokteik Viaduct: A Tale of Gentlemanly Capitalists, Unseen People, and a Bridge to Nowhere

“…Britain's efforts to dominate the new colony 6 in Upper Burma were likely interpreted by the local peoples in terms of traditional rivalries between Burmese, Chinese, and other potential raiders (e.g., see Rippa 2022;Waters 2018). Unequal alliances rooted in patronclient relations are typically important to mounting defense against invaders in that world that Sai Aung Tun describes as "feudal".…”

Guest Editorial: Crossing the river by feeling the stones – Alternative imaginaries of China and Southeast Asia in contemporary contexts

“…By focusing on a wider range of stakeholders in different sites of spatial scale, it allows an uncovering of more alternative interpretations to China's influence for a more informed study of China and Southeast Asia relations. We provide a brief summary of papers in this special section as follows: Cheng and Koh (2022) explore in the context of education institutions, Han (2022) in tourist spaces, whilst Rippa (2022) at the borderlands. The other three papers examine diverse stakeholders in different spatial configurations such as Cold War migrants (Zhou, 2022), ethnic minorities (Sims, 2022) and indigenous communities (Cai, 2022).…”

“…Such focus provides an alternative lens to look at how China's increased influences are experienced and understood in their daily lives that are beyond the scope of the top‐down vision of infrastructure development, and more importantly reveal how the involvement of local elites may create socio‐economic frictions. Whilst the predominant discourse on China's presence in Southeast Asian countries lies in the economic implications of the Chinese capital's inflow to the region, Han (2022) and Rippa (2022) address the alternative imaginaries of China by looking at individual and local community encounters with China on the ground. Rather than only equating China to the Chinese government, these two papers consider other actors such as Chinese tourists who are seen as manifestations of China in Southeast Asia.…”

“…This special section also reinforces earlier calls that mainland Southeast Asia's engagement with China should feature more for Southeast Asia and its political ambit, ASEAN where perhaps it would be more apt to refer this area as Mekong Southeast Asia ( South China Morning Post , 2020; Lin, 2021). The dominant regional focus has been on the South China Sea and maritime Southeast Asia given China's ‘aggressive’ actions out at sea at times, but as highlighted in the papers of Han (2022), Rippa (2022) and Sims (2022) in this special section and elsewhere, mainland Southeast Asia faces a litany of pressing economic and environmental issues that are intertwined with the Chinese presence in the Mekong. This is particularly witnessed in the Mekong River Basin where climate and food security concern the livelihoods of millions.…”