Post-orientalism on the Thai-Lao Border from 1954 to 2019

Abstract

This article explores how various Orientalist perspectives and their eventual hybridisation have shaped different conceptualisations of space along the Thai-Lao border. In this case, the original Orientalist spatial conceptualisation of borders was passed on from French during the colonial days to local academia and state practitioners along the Mekong basins. It held that the western spatial conceptualisation was objective and superior to others. It privileged the assumption that space and people should be separated according to their own state. Also, such conceptualisation was used in nationalistic policy formulation on space management by the states. However, such spatial conceptualisation became hybridised when the Westphalian border was embraced by the local elites, especially in Bangkok. This has become known as second order Orientalism. Since the independence of Laos in 1954, academic discussions on the Thai-Lao border, especially in International Relations, have been divided into three phases, each with different Orientalist perspectives. Yet, all were accompanied by a sense of Western superiority. From 1954 to 1975, the Westphalian border was not strictly applied by the then Thai and Lao governments due to American intervention in the region. After 1975, the territorial integrity concept was strictly applied, accompanied by an increase in nationalism.  After 1989, nationalism waned and trade along the border was promoted. This article argues that while this awareness is post-Orientalist, it is difficult to distinguish the Oriental from the non-Oriental. Indeed, the hybrid spatial conceptualisation among different political actors, local peoples, business entrepreneurs, state officers and academia has been more prevalent.