Patchwork States: The Localization of State Territoriality on the South Sudan-Uganda Border, 1914-2014*
Patchwork States: The Localization of State Territoriality on the South Sudan-Uganda Border, 1914-2014*
复制标题
拼凑而成的国家：南苏丹-乌干达边境国家领土的本地化，1914 年至 2014 年*
DOI：
10.1093/pastj/gtz052
复制
发表时间：
2020
期刊：
影响因子：
1.8
通讯作者：
Leonardi C
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Leonardi C
本文以2014年乌干达-南苏丹边界一段未划界的局部冲突为起点，考察自1914年殖民地建立以来边界两侧领土国家形成的历史。它认为，冲突是地方政府领土长期作为国家的一部分的结果，使国际边界同时成为地方国家的边界。一些学者认为，中央政府对边境地区的有限控制和地方领土的强化是非洲国家分裂和失败的标志。但文章认为，这种地方领土权应该被视为正在进行的国家形成过程的结果，在这个过程中，国家领土是通过地方参与和占用共同产生的。因此，该文件是更广泛的相关性超出非洲或后殖民历史，首先在贡献的空间方法来研究国家的形成，试图取代中心，边缘模式，强调当地国家的中心地位。其次，它提出了更广泛的边疆研究领域，认为国际边界已形成内部领土化的过程，以及由特定的动态跨境关系和治理。第三，它主张用历史和过程的方法来理解领土，认为这些国家的拼凑在过去的世纪中被捏造和重新加工，在国家边界的现行宪法中纠缠着多种多样的、不断变化的领土形式和规模。
This paper takes a localized conflict over a non-demarcated stretch of the Uganda–South Sudan boundary in 2014 as a starting point for examining the history of territorial state formation on either side of this border since its colonial creation in 1914. It argues that the conflict was an outcome of the long-term constitution of local government territories as patches of the state, making the international border simultaneously a boundary of the local state. Some scholars have seen the limited control of central governments over their borderlands and the intensification of local territorialities as signs of African state fragmentation and failure. But the article argues that this local territoriality should instead be seen as an outcome of ongoing state-formation processes in which state territory has been co-produced through local engagement and appropriation. The paper is thus of wider relevance beyond African or postcolonial history, firstly in contributing a spatial approach to studies of state formation which have sought to replace centre–periphery models with an emphasis on the centrality of the local state. Secondly it advances the broader field of borderlands studies by arguing that international boundaries have been shaped by processes of internal territorialisation as well as by the specific dynamics of cross-border relations and governance. Thirdly it advocates a historical and processual approach to understanding territory, arguing that the patchwork of these states has been fabricated and reworked over the past century, entangling multiple, changing forms and scales of territory in the ongoing constitution of state boundaries.