State-buildingSouth Asia remains one of the least integrated regions in the world. Although there is broad agreement on the need for stronger economic, infrastructure, and people-to-people connections, geopolitical realities since 1947 have continued to shape and constrain regional linkages. The Radcliffe Line not only defined Pakistan’s borders but also demarcated river systems, sacred spaces, and cultural, social, and national imaginaries. Therefore, understanding the disruptions caused by the Radcliffe Line’s creation of new national boundaries and their impact on existing connections and institutions is crucial for a critical history of modern Pakistan, India, and South Asia as a whole.

It is equally important to analyze the modalities, mechanisms, structures, and norms that emerged after 1947 to regulate, restrict, or redefine relations between Pakistan and India, as well as to govern inter-state relations. In many cases, these modalities, mechanisms, and structures took decades to develop, intricately linked to the development of new border provinces and the strengthening of “internal” center-state relations. Furthermore, these modalities reflected, on the one hand, the gradual increase in state capacity to create regulatory mechanisms and, on the other, the concerns in Pakistan and India about mobility, transnational links, and liminal groups and spaces.

This special topic section complements the scholarly literature on Partition, state-building in Pakistan, and Pakistan-India relations by offering a detailed, multidisciplinary analysis of how Pakistan has handled ruptures and regional connectivity since its founding. This section examines the challenges Pakistan faced after Partition, including the disruption of networks such as rail links and irrigation systems. Recent cross-border tensions between Pakistan and India demonstrate how the disruption of these links and systems still impacts Pakistan today. For example, the Radcliffe Line raised serious concerns in Pakistan about the flow of river waters, as India became an upper riparian state. In 1960, both countries signed the Indus Water Treaty, which governs the allocation of water from the Indus River. Both India and Pakistan adhered to the treaty’s terms, and water continued to flow even during wartime. However, in May 2025, India announced its suspension of the treaty and, as a result, serious concerns have emerged in Pakistan.

This special topic section also discusses border regimes and surveillance systems established by Pakistan and India over decades to manage their often-changing boundaries as well as new ideas about border provinces in Pakistan. The section highlights how the protracted process of “partitioning” and regulating mobility affected national imaginations, identities, and religious ties. The impact on Sikh identity and networks is emphasized. This section also explores how state mechanisms and protocols can both divide and connect, potentially improving diplomatic and people-to-people relations between Pakistan and India. The growth of sports diplomacy and the rise and restrictions of what has long been called “cricket diplomacy” between the two countries demonstrate this dynamic. Currently, tensions between India and Pakistan have led both nations to agree that they will only face each other in matches organized by the International Cricket Council at neutral venues.

The articles in this special section were presented at a conference hosted by the Institute of South Asian Studies at the National University of Singapore. The conference aimed to explore how the creation of new boundaries impacted linkages, mobility, and networks in South Asia. Focusing on “rupture” and “connectivity,” the event sought to provide insights into state-building processes, the development of modalities and technologies that regulate mobility, and the concurrent evolution of national discourses and imaginaries. Examining these issues also involved investigating how individuals and communities affected by Partition’s ruptures responded. Additionally, participants discussed how Pakistan, India, and South Asia remain connected and influenced by developments across borders, whether officially or unofficially, willingly or unwillingly.

By emphasizing rupture and connectivity, the articles in this section aim to broaden how Pakistan is studied and discussed, highlighting Pakistan’s complex stories through a comparative and transregional approach. Additionally, by focusing on rupture and connectivity, the articles challenge prevailing ideas about borders, mobility, and the anxieties associated with movement and interaction. This focus offers a valuable addition to state-centered histories. Ian Talbot’s article, for example, explores how events in the Lahore-Amritsar borderland interacted with broader Indo-Pakistan relations in the early post-independence period. Through case studies such as the 1951 War Scare and 1955 Cricket Diplomacy, Talbot demonstrates that Punjab was both vulnerable to incursions and spy scares and, paradoxically, served as a bridge between India and Pakistan. Ilyas Chattha also examines border anxieties in his article on Pakistan’s efforts to control cross-border movement and establish territorial and fiscal sovereignty. The article traces how the state viewed the movement of people and goods across borders and sought to regulate it through bureaucratic procedures and official discourses that defined “legal” and “illegal” movement.

Several articles emphasize efforts to regulate mobility, including the movement of water, people, and goods. This issue has become especially urgent as recent military exchanges between India and Pakistan have led India to push for complete border sealing. David Gilmartin’s article explores the flow of canal waters between India and Pakistan and the history of the Indus Waters Treaty, highlighting how the treaty effectively created two separate river basins and distinct Indian and Pakistani “national spaces” of water control. However, Gilmartin also emphasizes that the two countries’ histories remain connected through their shared experience of internal water conflicts. Examining a different form of mobility, Iqbal Singh Sevea’s article on cross-border religious travel traces how visits to sacred sites have been regulated over time. This article discusses how religious groups responded to being separated from these sites by Partition and details the negotiations between Pakistan and India to facilitate and regulate religious travel. Haimanti Roy investigates how technologies used to control cross-border travel have influenced notions of belonging, otherization, and citizenship. Roy’s article demonstrates how documents such as passports, permits, domicile certificates, and migration certificates became key interfaces between the state and its citizens. Focusing on mobile groups, including minorities and women who married non-citizens, the article shows how these documents became vital evidence in claims of citizenship and belonging.

Collectively, the articles in this special section examine how Partition influenced identities, community ideas, and national visions. Topics include how religious groups responded to being separated from their religious sites on the “other” side, and how people living near the border felt about their daily cross-border interactions being labeled “illegal.” These issues are central to Kanika Singh’s article, which explores the development of Sikh identity, politics, and religiosity after the division of Punjab’s shared religious space. By analyzing the Sikh community’s claims to gurdwaras in India and Pakistan, Singh demonstrates that these claims are closely connected to current experiences and acts of shared devotion.

As noted earlier, the ruptures caused by Partition also prompted efforts to forge new connections. Amid the disruptions of Partition and geopolitical tensions, Pakistan and India had to find ways to share water, facilitate religious travel, and promote trade. Several articles highlight how both states tried to foster these connections. For example, Ali Khan’s article explores how the broader political environment influenced cricket ties between Pakistan and India. However, because tensions and disputes do not solely characterize relations between the two countries, he notes that cricket interactions have also offered moments of hope and optimism.

Overall, this special section seeks to make a significant contribution to the study of contemporary Pakistan by placing its postcolonial experience within the larger context of ruptures and mobility in the Subcontinent. The section gathers scholars from various fields who offer an understanding of Pakistan that extends beyond national borders.