PHANTOM BORDERS AS A PHENOMENON IN POLITICAL GEOGRAPHY
Abstract
The need to investigate historical («phantom») state borders is stated and the main directions and theoretical approaches of such studies are discussed. Phantom borders have lost the most important functions as dividing lines between the states but remain important political, economic and cultural barriers considerably influencing both contemporary activities and the territorial identity. Social perception of a territory is frequently beyond its legitimate borders embracing the regions lost as a result of wars and/or fragmentation of territorial identities. The outlines of a state territory are the country’s brand and the element of identity, and almost any change of its borders is painfully perceived by the population. Phantom borders play a significant role in the symbolic landscape and can be used to mobilize public opinion. One can distinguish four approaches to their study: morphological, functional-structural, geopolitical and postmodern (constructivist) ones. The «classical» cases of phantom borders in Poland and Ukraine are briefly described: they remain visible in the cultural landscape. In Russia, there are two main types of such borders: the lines separating the territories incorporated to the Soviet Union as a result of the World War II and former frontiers in the south and the east which form a specific type of phantom borders, as in many countries of Europe, America and Asia.
About the Author
V. A. Kolosov
Institute of Geography, Russian Academy of Sciences; Lomonosov Moscow State University.
Russian Federation
Deputy Director; Faculty of Geography, Head of the Department of Geography of World Economy, Professor, D.Sc. in Geography.
Russian Federation
Deputy Director; Faculty of Geography, Head of the Department of Geography of World Economy, Professor, D.Sc. in Geography.
References
1. Alexandrova A.Yu., Stupina O.G. Turistskoe regionovedenie. Vliyanie regionalnoy integratcii na mirovoy turistskiy rynok [Turism Regional Studies. The impact of regional integration on the world tourist market]. М.: Knorus, 2013 (in Russian).
2. Balibar E. Politics and the Other Scene. Paris: Verso, 2002. Bialasiewicz L.Europe as/at the border: Trieste and the meaning of Europe // Social & Cultural Geography. 2009. V. 10. № 3. P. 257– 269.
3. Billé F. Territorial phantom pains (and other cartographic anxieties) // Environment and Planning D: Society and Space. 2013. V. 31. № 1. P. 163–178.
4. Border disputes. A Global Encyclopedia / Ed. E Brunet-Jailly Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-Clio, 2015.
5. Dallen Т.J. Political Boundaries and Tourism: Borders as Tourist Attractions // Tourism Management. 1995. V. 16. № 7. P. 525–532.
6. Foucher M. Fronts et frontieres. Paris: Fayard, 1991.
7. Foucher M. La bataille des cartes. Analyse critique des visions du monde. Paris: François Bourin Éditeur, 2011.
8. Gorzelak G. Normalizing Polish-German Relations: CrossBorder Cooperation in Regional Development / J.W. Scott , Ed. EU Enlargement, Region Building and Shifting Borders of Inclusion and Exclusion, Aldershot: Ashgate, 2006. P. 195–206.
9. Grandits H., von Hirschhausen B., Kraft C., Müller D., Serrier T. Phantomgrenzen im östlichen Europa. Einewissenschaftliche Positionierung. Göttingen: Wallstein-Verlag, 2015.
10. Grin’ko I.A. «Muzejnye granicy» i formirovanie novykh identichnostei [«Museumborders» and the formation of new identities] // Samarskij nauchnyj vestnik, 2016. № 4(17). P. 149– 152 (in Russian).
11. Hartshorn R. Geographic and political boundaries in Upper Silesia // Annals of the Association of American Geographers. 1933. V. 23. № 4. P. 195–228.
12. Hartshorn R. Suggestions on the terminology of political boundaries, titles and abstracts of papers // Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 1936. Vol. 26, № 1.P. 38–39.
13. Hesli V., Reisinger W., Miller A. Political Party Development in Divided Societies: The Case of Ukraine // Electoral Studies, 1998.Vol. 17, N 2.P. 235–256.
14. Jańczak J. Phantom borders and electoral behavior in Poland historical legacies, political culture and their influence on contemporary politics // Erdkunde. 2015. V. 69. № 2. P. 125–137.
15. Kolosov V., Scott J.W. Karelia: A Finnish–Russian Borderland on the Edge of Neighbourhood / The EU-Russia Borderland. New Contexts for Regional Cooperation / Ed. by H.Eskelinen, I.Liikanen and J.W. Scott. London and New York: Routledge, 2012. P. 194– 221.
16. Kolosov V.A. Issledovaniya politicheskikh granits s nachala XX veka do nashikh dnei [Political borders’ studies since the early 20th century till nowadays] // Izvestia RAN, ser. geogr., 2008. №5. P. 8–20 (in Russian).
17. Kolosov V.A., Tikunov V.S. Politiko-geograficheskoe kartografirovanie i geoinformatika: dostizheniya i novye zadachi [Political-geographical mapping and geoinformatics: achievements and new tasks] // Izvestia RAN, ser. geogr., 2005. № 1. P. 17–23 (in Russian).
18. Koter M. «Kresy» as a Specific Type of Borderland – It’s Origin and Characteristics // Geographica Slovenica, 2001. Vol. 34, N 1.P. 131–148.
19. Kubicek P. Regional Polarisation in Ukraine: Public Opinion, Voting and Legislative Behaviour // Europe-Asia Studies, 2000. V. 52. № 2. P. 273–294.
20. Newman D. Contemporary Research Agendas in Border Studies: An Overview’ / Ed. D. Wastl-Water. Ashgate Research Companion to Border Studies. Oxford: Ashgate Publishers, 2011. P. 33–47.
21. O’Dowd L., Wilson T. Frontiers of sovereignty in the new Europe / Ed.N. Alkan. Borders of Europe. Universitat Bonn: Bonn, 2002. P. 7–30.
22. O’Loughlin J. The Regional Factor in Contemporary Ukrainian Politics: Scale, Place, Space, or Bogus effect? // Post-Soviet Geography and Economics. 2001. V. 42. № 1. P. 1–33.
23. Opiola W. About the Role of the State Border in the Theory of Borderland. Open Europe: Cutural Dialogue Across Borders. V. 2: Historical Collective Memory within Borderlands. Opole: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Opolskiego. 2014. P. 27–35.
24. Poluan P. «Obmen naseleniem» Polshi i SSSR, 1944–1946 [The exchange of population between Poland and the USSR, 1944– 1946]. http://www.demoscope.ru/weekly/2007/0313/analit06.php. 4 April2013 [Accessed on 10 March 2017] (in Russian).
25. Ponomarev S. Kartograficheskaya agressiya Yaponii protiv Rossii [Cartographical aggression of Japan against Russia]. Sakhalinskoe informatsionno-analiticheskoe agentstvo (SIAA), 7 May 2008. http://siaa.ru/?pg=2&id=155934&type=127&page=26&hd= [Accessed on 10 March 2017] (in Russian).
26. Popov F.A. Geografia setsessionizma v sovremennom mire [Geography of secessionism in the contemporary world]. М.: Novyi Khronograf, 2012 (in Russian).
27. Rykaіa A. Ethno-religious heritage of former eastern territories of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth in contemporary Poland // European Spatial Research and Policy. 2013. V. 20. № 1. P. 49–70.
28. Sebentsov A.B., Kolosov V.A. Fenomen nekontoliruemykh territoriy v sovremennom mire [The phenomenon of non-controlled territories in the contemporary world] // Polis (Politicheskie issledovania), 2012. № 2(128). P. 31–46 (in Russian).
29. Shiriaev E.E. Belarus: Rus’ Belaya, Rus’ Chernaya i Litva v kartakh [Belarus: White Rus’, Black Rus’ and Lithuania in Maps]. Minsk: Navuka i tekhnika, 1991 (in Russian).
30. Sobczynski M. Polskie doswiadczenia w zakresie badania granic reliktowych i krajobrazu pogranicza. Czas i przestrzeс w naukach geograficznych. Wybrane problemy geografii historycznej. 2008. http://hdl.handle.net/11089/3899 (Дата обращения: 10.03.2017).
31. Subtelny O. Ukraine: A History. University of Toronto Press: Toronto, 1988.
32. Tarkhov S.A. Transformatsiya transportnoy sistemy [Transformation of transport network] // Regionalnoe razvitie i regionalnaya politika Rossii v perekhodnyj period. М.: Moscow Bauman State Technical University Press, 2011. P. 107–129 (in Russian).
33. Tarkov S.A. Evolutsionnaya morfologiya transportnykh setej [Evolutional morphology of transport networks]. Smolensk– Moscow: Universum, 2005 (in Russian).
34. Tolstoguzov O.V. Region v usloviyakh globalizatsii: prostranstvennyi i institutsionalnyi aspekty [Region in the conditions of globalization: the spatial and the institutional aspects] // Trudy KNTs RAN. Seria: Region, ekonomika, upravlenie, 2012. № 6. P. 19–28 (in Russian).
35. Ushakin S.N. «Nam etoi bol’u dyshat’?» О travme, pamiati i soobshhestvakh [We have to breath this pain? About trauma, memory and communities]. Travma: punkty. Collection of papers. Ushakin S. and Trubina E. (eds.) М.: Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie, 2009. P. 5– 41 (in Russian).
36. Von Löwis S. Ambivalente Identifikationsräume in der Westukraine: das Phantom der alten Grenzen am Zbruč // Europa Regional. 2015. № 3–4. S. 148–162.
37. Zapadnye okrainy Rossiiskoj imperii [Western edges of the Russian Empire]. Eds: M. Dolbilov and A. Miller. М.:Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie. 2007 (in Russian).
38. Zarycki T. The electoral geography of Poland: between stable spatial structures and their changing interpretations // Erdkunde. 2015. V. 69. № 2. P. 107–124.
Review
For citations:
Kolosov V.A. PHANTOM BORDERS AS A PHENOMENON IN POLITICAL GEOGRAPHY. Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta. Seriya 5, Geografiya. 2017;(5):3-11. (In Russ.)
Views:
2302
Email this article 
