Frontiers and Boundaries Assignment PDF

Preview

Summary

POLITICAL GEOGRAPHYASSIGNMENTSUBMITTED TO: DR. BHARTI DAVESUBMITTED BY: PRACHI TANWARROLL NUMBER: 18/B. (HONS.) GEOGRAPHY3 RD YEAR, 6TH SEMESTERQUESTION) Discuss in detail the concept of Frontiers and Boundaries with suitable examples.ANSWERS) The two term, frontiers and boundaries, are often used i...

Description

POLITICAL GEOGRAPHY ASSIGNMENT SUBMITTED TO: DR. BHARTI DAVE SUBMITTED BY: PRACHI TANWAR ROLL NUMBER: 18/224 B.A. (HONS.) GEOGRAPHY 3RD YEAR, 6TH SEMESTER

QUESTION) Discuss in detail the concept of Frontiers and Boundaries with suitable examples. ANSWERS) The two term, frontiers and boundaries, are often used interchangeably in the non-geographical literature. In political geography the two carry distinct connotations and cannot be used as synonyms. Boundaries are lines demarcating the outer limits of territory under the sovereign jurisdiction of a nation-state. Frontiers are zones of varying width separating the ecumene’s (fully developed and politically and economically integrated parts of a given pair of States. These may consist the uninhabited or sparsely populated areas of marginal utility need to define the precise areal limits of their political jurisdiction. DIFFERENCE BETWEEN FRONTIERS AND BOUNDARIES The following are the distinctions between boundaries and frontiers: 1) Frontiers are outer oriented, whereas boundaries are inner oriented. In the case of a frontier the main attention is directed towards the outlying areas which are both a source of danger and a coveted prize. The hinterland- the motherland – is seldom the directing force behind the pulsations of the frontier line. The boundary, on the contrary, is inner oriented. It is created and maintained at the will of the central government. 2) The frontier is a manifestation of “centrifugal forces”, whereas boundary is that of “centripetal” ones. This distinction derives respectively from their ‘outer’ and ‘inner’ orientations in relation to the ecumene. 3) A frontier is as “integrating factor” between States on either side, but a boundary is a “separating factor”. Being a zone of transition between the sphere of one way of life and another, the frontier represents forces which are neither fully assimilated into, nor satisfied with either State. It provides an excellent opportunity for mutual interpenetration and sway, between the frontier communities of the neighbouring States. Hence, the frontier is an integrating factor. Whereas in boundaries, the physicalgeographical, cultural and political factors may tend to make it inconspicuous, the

4)

5)

6)

7)

boundary must remain essentially a barrier, impeding integrations across the borderline. Frontiers are transitional between geographical regions, rather than between states. They are geographical rather than political in nature. Boundaries are purely political in origin and function. Frontiers are areal and boundaries are linear in character. The former may be described in “natural” in so far as they are parts of the earth’s surface. In some cases, frontiers fall in the category of “geographical” regions, in as much as they possess the quality of individuality based on their function as transitional zones. Boundaries are artificial, since they are selected, defined and demarcated by man. Frontiers are a phenomenon of the past, whereas boundaries belong to the present. This is because unlike the case of the frontier, the linear boundary is indispensable to the functioning of the modern State. Finally, a frontier, whether physical, linguistic, religious or ethnic, cannot be moved. It may change, and lose much of its frontier function, but it much remains in position. In contrast boundaries are by no means immovable. Until the second World War almost every shift in the balance of power between neighbouring pair of States used to be reflected in a shift of the location of the boundary line.

CLASSIFICATION OF INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARIES There are two important systems of classification of international boundaries. 1) First is the functional also called genetic classification. It is based on the nature of the relationship between the boundary line and the evolution of the cultural landscape of the State whose sovereignty it defines, delimits and separates. 2) Secondly boundaries may be classified in accordance with their form, that is their demarcation and fixation on the ground. A boundary may often be drawn to follow some conspicuous physical feature, such as mountain range, a river or a lake. These are physical or physiographic boundaries.  Boundaries may also be drawn to follow a geometric line (geometrical boundaries) or separate certain ethnic communities (ethnic or anthropogeographic boundaries).  In most boundaries more than one criterion of delimitation may be involved. Hence, most boundaries are complex in nature. This classification is called the morphological classification. Genetic or functional classification The genetic classification of boundaroies is based on the relationship that a boundary line had shated with the surrounding culture landscape at the time of its demarcation. The nomenclature used in this classification was suggested by Richard Hartshone in a paper abstracted in the Annals of the Association of American Geographers in 1936. It was derived from physical geography, although the amalogy between the mechanics of river development and the dynamics of international boundaries was imperfect.

1) Antecedent Boundaries Such boundaries predate the evolution of the cultural landscape. In other words, an antecedent boundary was drawn before the development of most of the features of the cultural landscape. They are most common type to come across in the New World. Here international boundaries were agreed upon at the conference table even before the concerned territory was fully explored and colonized. Examples: The Andes Mountains form the eastern boundary of Chile, separating it from neighboring Argentina and Bolivia. 2) Subsequent Boundaries These boundaries are whose definition and demarcation had followed the evolution of the cultural landscape. Such boundaries often conform to ethnic-cultural divisions of the landscape, specially, the divisions of language and religion. Examples: Most boundaries in Eastern Europe, and those between India and Pakistan, and India and Bangladesh belong to this type. Yugoslavia was formed following World War I by the merger of several territories. Economic and political unrest in the 1980s led to much fighting and eventually Yugoslavia was split into separate states. 3) Superimposed Boundaries These are subsequent boundaries of a specific type. These boindaries were also drawn aster the cultural landscape had fully evolved. The difference lies that the former type conforms to the cultural division between neighbouring communities, and were decided upon through mutual agreement. The latter do not conform to the social-cultural divisions. They were imposed upon the concerned communities, either by outside powers or the overbearing unit between the two. Basically, these are drawn on an area by a conquering or colonizing power that ignores existing cultural patterns. Examples: Most colonial boundaries in Africa are of this type. In many cases, single communities were divided into two or more states. The boundaries of Ghana, Togoland, Dahomey, Nigeria and the Somalian Republics are examples. Truce- line boundaries also belong to this type. 4) Relic or Relict Boundaries These represent boundary lines which have currently lost political fuction, but which may still be discernible in the cultural landscape. Such boundary lines result when a smaller State is absorbed by a larger one, or when former boundaries between States are abandoned and redrawn. Examples: the Berlin Wall, which was built in 1961 by Soviet controlled East Germany to contain the portion of the city that had been given over to America, England, and France to administer. Former boundaries between Poland and Germany, anf former boundary between Spanish America and the United States in the south west.

Morphological Classification 1) Physiographic Boundaries These boundaries were drawn to follow conspicuous features of the physical landscape. Since these boundaries follow some natural feature of the physical landscape, they are sometimes wrongly reffered to as natural boundaries, as contract to boundaries drawn to follow certain geometric lines or divisions of language or religion. The latter are sometimes referred to as artificail boundaries. Though, the distinction is not correct. All boundaries are man-made, hence are artificial. When the European States assumed their present form and pattern, clearly defined boundary lines became a necessity and the mountain ranges, river streams and such other conspicuous features already exerting some barrier influence, were selected to serve as boundaries between States. i)

Mountain Boundaries: these are most favoured type since they have traditionally served as natural barriers. Being firmly fixed on the ground, mountain bounadries were sonsidered to be highly stable. However, revolutionary changes in transport and communications and the opening of the sky as a highway, has greatly reduced their function as protective barriers. As the Chinese invasion on India across the Himalayas proved even the loftiest of the mountains are no longer impregnable. The location of the boundary line along a mountain range often posses difficult problems since mountain ranges do not possess a well defined crest line. Even where the crest lines exist they are often divided by transverse valley. Besides, most mountain ranges consists of several semi-parallel ranges, each with its separate crest line. Therefore, coincedence between the crest line and the water divide between streams flowing down its opposite slopes is seldom found.

ii)

River as International Boundaries: many international boundaries are based on river streams. The advantages of selecting a river as boundary are: a) It is a clearly marked feature on the map b) It is a more narrowly defined (almost linear) feature than mountain and hills c) Wide, unfordable streams offered a barrier to communications and as such were thought to possess some military value by providing a line of defence against an advancing army. Irrespective of these advantages the choice of rivers as international boundaries has seldom proved satisfactory. First, drainage basins generally tend to exert a unifying rather than a separating influence since rivers and their valleys provide lines of movement that promote social and commercial intercourse. River basins generally consist of fertile alluvial plains supporting dense populations. Therefore, an international boundary drawn along or across a river, disrupts

settled communities creates problems in river water utilization and management. The India-Pakistan boundary through the Indus basin, and the lndo-Bangladesh boundary are two important cases in point. Once a river is selected to serve as the boundary between two adjacent States, the problem arise, as to how to locate the boundary line. Generally, the boundary line may follow the median line, or middle of the navigable channel, or one of the shorelines. A median line may be defined as the line joining all points which are equidistant from the nearest points on opposite shores. The main difficulty in the adoption of the median line as boundary, is that it makes an equal division of the water surface rather than its volume.

iii)

Forests, Swamps and Deserts: By their nature, these three features act as cultural divides. The Sahara, all through history, separated the European dominated culture of the Mediterranean basin from the distinctive African culture region lying to the south of it. The north-eastern parts of Europe provide salient examples of the role of forests as cultural divides. They separate the Finns from the Russians, the Russians from the Lithuanians, and the Lithuanians from the Poles. Though much less effective as cultural barriers, marshes have nevertheless served as a basis for drawing bounds between States. The Pripet Marshes in White Russia were, between the First and the Second War, traversed by the—boundary between Poland and the Soviet Union. However, it is rare for a, one of these barriers to be deliberately chosen for the alignment of an international boundary. An example is the Rann of Kutch, on the international border between Pakistan and the State of Gujarat in India, which had led to military confrontation between India and Pakistan in 1965, would prove that marsh lead to international disputes, once they begin to appear of some economic value.

2) Geometrical Boundaries These are straight-line boundaries following lines of latitude or longitude or, in some cases, to follow arcs drawn from a set of fixed points. The State of Gambia in West Africa has its boundaries fixed by arcs drawn from the centre of River Gambia. The adoption of the lines of latitude or longitude as boundaries between States is quite common in North and South America, Australia and Africa. Such boundaries are characteristics of newly colonized areas where, at the time that the boundaries were fixed, detailed knowledge of the terrain was not available, the areas were sparsely settled and as such, straight-line boundaries were found convenient to demarcate the spheres of control of the rival colonial powers. Many of the straight-line boundaries of Africa defined at the 1884-1885 Berlin Conference.

3) Anthropogeographic Boundaries These boundaries are drawn to separate adjacent political communities, speaking different languages or following different religions of divided by some other cultural element creating differences in nationalism. These boundaries are a feature of the post-First World War period, when boundaries in Central and Eastern Europe were re-adjusted with a view to separate different nationalities on the principle of allowing each nationality the right of sovereign political status. Since people speaking different languages, following different religions, or sharing common traditions do not, in reality live in neatly defined areas, adoption of the geographical distribution of a certain ethnic element as the basis of political sovereignty may often necessitate large scale transfer of population, resulting in great hardship to the dislocated people. The sad plight of refugees on both sides of the border in India and Pakistan, in 1947, is the most salient example in recent history. The Indo-Pak also highlights how such boundary lines disrupt regional economic unity, creating serious environmental problems....