There is a new interest in the study of Asia’s borderlands, based on a sense that state-centered views hamper our understanding of social dynamics in broader regional fields. Of course, most studies of society, culture and history in Asia still accept national territories as the natural building blocks of academic enquiry, perpetuating notions such as Indian society, the Chinese economy, or Indonesian culture. They imply that borders between states are not only of a political and administrative nature, but that they also create separate social, economic and cultural realms. To counter such methodological nationalism, scholarship on Asia is moving in new directions, and the emerging interest in borderland perspectives is one of the results. Compared to other continents, borderland studies were relatively slow to develop in Asia, even though they are of particular importance in the exceptionally multi-ethnic and multi-linguistic social landscapes that characterize much of Asia.

Many of Asia’s borders owe their existence to colonial state making and the violent histories that this involved. Even the borders of states that were never formally colonized, such as China, Thailand and Nepal, were the outcome of interaction with colonial border making. Decolonization often was a hasty retreat under pressure of civil conflict or war. It left Asia with many borders that are disputed. The disputes are not only territorial ones between states. Most Asian borders divide people who share languages and ethnic identities and who have been longstanding partners in realms as diverse as trade, agriculture, religious practice and marriage. Consequently, when confronted with borders in their everyday lives, Asians often experience them as arbitrary.