From Curzon to the Northeast: How Colonial Borders Still Shape India
In 1907, two years after retiring as Viceroy of India, George Nathaniel Curzon delivered the prestigious Romanes Lecture at Oxford. His chosen theme was Frontiers.
Curzon argued that the idea of rigid, well-guarded national borders was essentially a European invention. Outside Europe, he said, boundaries were far more fluid — they shifted with the power of rulers and faded into neighbouring domains without sharp lines.
That observation rings true when we look at India today. Almost every modern border of India is a colonial legacy, drawn not by local rulers but by the British Empire.
Colonial Lines That Still Define India
Consider a few examples:
- Radcliffe Line (1947): Divided India and Pakistan.
- McMahon Line (1914): Still contested with China.
- Durand Line (1893): Partition-era boundary with Afghanistan.
Even earlier, the British were busy carving boundaries:
- Treaty of Sugauli (1816): India–Nepal border.
- Pemberton-Johnstone-Maxwell Line (1834): Manipur–Burma boundary.
So when we talk of “India’s borders,” we are, in fact, talking about British-drawn maps.
Natural vs Artificial Boundaries
Curzon also distinguished between two types of borders:
- Natural boundaries — rivers, seas, deserts.
- Artificial boundaries — lines drawn by conquest or treaties (most modern borders).
But today, even the idea of “natural” boundaries is fading. Just think of the endless disputes over maritime zones.
The British Playbook: Suzerainty & Protectorates
The British didn’t always annex territories outright. Instead, they invented the concept of suzerainty — keeping princely states formally independent but tightly controlled.
Protectorate states like Tibet became buffers against rival European powers such as Russia in Central Asia and France in Indochina. Curzon proudly described this as a three-layered buffer system. For Britain, it was strategy; but for the region, it was the start of future border disputes.
The Forgotten Populations of the Northeast
One of colonialism’s biggest blind spots was its treatment of what scholar James C. Scott calls “non-state-bearing populations.”
These were small tribal communities in upland Southeast Asia (including much of today’s Northeast India). Living off shifting cultivation and hunting, their loyalties were to clans and villages, not to states. The British annexed Assam in 1826 but left the surrounding “wild hills” largely unadministered, except for occasional punitive expeditions.
To formalise this divide, the Inner Line Regulation of 1873 drew a line separating the taxable plains from the untaxed hills. Over time, these became known as Excluded and Partially Excluded Areas — an administrative model later exported to Burma and Manipur.
Post-Colonial Fallout: Insurgencies & Borders
Fast forward to modern India: many of these tribal populations, once outside the state system, now find themselves divided across hard national borders. Unsurprisingly, this has fueled insurgencies and ethnic conflicts in the Northeast for decades.
The current protests against fencing the India–Myanmar border and scrapping the Free Movement Regime (FMR) are part of this story. Communities divided by colonial lines are resisting today’s hardened borders.
Enter the Westphalian State
Why can’t we just go back to open borders? The answer lies in Europe’s own bloody history.
The Treaties of Westphalia (1648) ended centuries of wars by agreeing that:
- National boundaries define sovereignty.
- Citizenship is based on domicile, not ethnicity or faith.
- States run on taxation and provide services in return.
This model spread worldwide, including to India. And in today’s global system, hard borders are unavoidable.
The Northeast Dilemma
Here lies the contradiction: many Northeast states depend heavily on central transfers rather than their own tax revenue. This weakens the basic tax–citizen relationship that underpins the Westphalian model. Add ethnic loyalties and cross-border ties, and you get today’s tensions.
Still, acknowledging the reality of modern nation-states is crucial. A secular state — where ethnicity and religion are private matters — is not just an ethical position, but a practical survival strategy for diverse societies like India.
The Road Ahead
India may have little choice but to fence parts of its borders, especially with the crisis in Myanmar and China’s growing influence. But fences need not mean walls. Borders can be permeable yet accountable, allowing communities to maintain ties without undermining sovereignty.
Curzon’s century-old reflections remind us that the lines we take for granted were once unknown. Colonial maps have become our modern reality — and navigating that legacy remains one of India’s toughest challenges.
Receive Daily Updates
Recent Posts
- In the Large States category (overall), Chhattisgarh ranks 1st, followed by Odisha and Telangana, whereas, towards the bottom are Maharashtra at 16th, Assam at 17th and Gujarat at 18th. Gujarat is one State that has seen startling performance ranking 5th in the PAI 2021 Index outperforming traditionally good performing States like Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka, but ranks last in terms of Delta
- In the Small States category (overall), Nagaland tops, followed by Mizoram and Tripura. Towards the tail end of the overall Delta ranking is Uttarakhand (9th), Arunachal Pradesh (10th) and Meghalaya (11th). Nagaland despite being a poor performer in the PAI 2021 Index has come out to be the top performer in Delta, similarly, Mizoram’s performance in Delta is also reflected in it’s ranking in the PAI 2021 Index
- In terms of Equity, in the Large States category, Chhattisgarh has the best Delta rate on Equity indicators, this is also reflected in the performance of Chhattisgarh in the Equity Pillar where it ranks 4th. Following Chhattisgarh is Odisha ranking 2nd in Delta-Equity ranking, but ranks 17th in the Equity Pillar of PAI 2021. Telangana ranks 3rd in Delta-Equity ranking even though it is not a top performer in this Pillar in the overall PAI 2021 Index. Jharkhand (16th), Uttar Pradesh (17th) and Assam (18th) rank at the bottom with Uttar Pradesh’s performance in line with the PAI 2021 Index
- Odisha and Nagaland have shown the best year-on-year improvement under 12 Key Development indicators.
- In the 60:40 division States, the top three performers are Kerala, Goa and Tamil Nadu and, the bottom three performers are Uttar Pradesh, Jharkhand and Bihar.
- In the 90:10 division States, the top three performers were Himachal Pradesh, Sikkim and Mizoram; and, the bottom three performers are Manipur, Assam and Meghalaya.
- Among the 60:40 division States, Orissa, Chhattisgarh and Madhya Pradesh are the top three performers and Tamil Nadu, Telangana and Delhi appear as the bottom three performers.
- Among the 90:10 division States, the top three performers are Manipur, Arunachal Pradesh and Nagaland; and, the bottom three performers are Jammu and Kashmir, Uttarakhand and Himachal Pradesh
- Among the 60:40 division States, Goa, West Bengal and Delhi appear as the top three performers and Andhra Pradesh, Telangana and Bihar appear as the bottom three performers.
- Among the 90:10 division States, Mizoram, Himachal Pradesh and Tripura were the top three performers and Jammu & Kashmir, Nagaland and Arunachal Pradesh were the bottom three performers
- West Bengal, Bihar and Tamil Nadu were the top three States amongst the 60:40 division States; while Haryana, Punjab and Rajasthan appeared as the bottom three performers
- In the case of 90:10 division States, Mizoram, Assam and Tripura were the top three performers and Nagaland, Jammu & Kashmir and Uttarakhand featured as the bottom three
- Among the 60:40 division States, the top three performers are Kerala, Andhra Pradesh and Orissa and the bottom three performers are Madhya Pradesh, Jharkhand and Goa
- In the 90:10 division States, the top three performers are Mizoram, Sikkim and Nagaland and the bottom three performers are Manipur and Assam
In a diverse country like India, where each State is socially, culturally, economically, and politically distinct, measuring Governance becomes increasingly tricky. The Public Affairs Index (PAI 2021) is a scientifically rigorous, data-based framework that measures the quality of governance at the Sub-national level and ranks the States and Union Territories (UTs) of India on a Composite Index (CI).
States are classified into two categories – Large and Small – using population as the criteria.
In PAI 2021, PAC defined three significant pillars that embody Governance – Growth, Equity, and Sustainability. Each of the three Pillars is circumscribed by five governance praxis Themes.
The themes include – Voice and Accountability, Government Effectiveness, Rule of Law, Regulatory Quality and Control of Corruption.
At the bottom of the pyramid, 43 component indicators are mapped to 14 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) that are relevant to the States and UTs.
This forms the foundation of the conceptual framework of PAI 2021. The choice of the 43 indicators that go into the calculation of the CI were dictated by the objective of uncovering the complexity and multidimensional character of development governance
The Equity Principle
The Equity Pillar of the PAI 2021 Index analyses the inclusiveness impact at the Sub-national level in the country; inclusiveness in terms of the welfare of a society that depends primarily on establishing that all people feel that they have a say in the governance and are not excluded from the mainstream policy framework.
This requires all individuals and communities, but particularly the most vulnerable, to have an opportunity to improve or maintain their wellbeing. This chapter of PAI 2021 reflects the performance of States and UTs during the pandemic and questions the governance infrastructure in the country, analysing the effectiveness of schemes and the general livelihood of the people in terms of Equity.
Growth and its Discontents
Growth in its multidimensional form encompasses the essence of access to and the availability and optimal utilisation of resources. By resources, PAI 2021 refer to human resources, infrastructure and the budgetary allocations. Capacity building of an economy cannot take place if all the key players of growth do not drive development. The multiplier effects of better health care, improved educational outcomes, increased capital accumulation and lower unemployment levels contribute magnificently in the growth and development of the States.
The Pursuit Of Sustainability
The Sustainability Pillar analyses the access to and usage of resources that has an impact on environment, economy and humankind. The Pillar subsumes two themes and uses seven indicators to measure the effectiveness of government efforts with regards to Sustainability.
The Curious Case Of The Delta
The Delta Analysis presents the results on the State performance on year-on-year improvement. The rankings are measured as the Delta value over the last five to 10 years of data available for 12 Key Development Indicators (KDI). In PAI 2021, 12 indicators across the three Pillars of Equity (five indicators), Growth (five indicators) and Sustainability (two indicators). These KDIs are the outcome indicators crucial to assess Human Development. The Performance in the Delta Analysis is then compared to the Overall PAI 2021 Index.
Key Findings:-
In the Scheme of Things
The Scheme Analysis adds an additional dimension to ranking of the States on their governance. It attempts to complement the Governance Model by trying to understand the developmental activities undertaken by State Governments in the form of schemes. It also tries to understand whether better performance of States in schemes reflect in better governance.
The Centrally Sponsored schemes that were analysed are National Health Mission (NHM), Umbrella Integrated Child Development Services scheme (ICDS), Mahatma Gandh National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (MGNREGS), Samagra Shiksha Abhiyan (SmSA) and MidDay Meal Scheme (MDMS).
National Health Mission (NHM)
INTEGRATED CHILD DEVELOPMENT SERVICES (ICDS)
MID- DAY MEAL SCHEME (MDMS)
SAMAGRA SHIKSHA ABHIYAN (SMSA)
MAHATMA GANDHI NATIONAL RURAL EMPLOYMENT GUARANTEE SCHEME (MGNREGS)