nandita sharma

In the ‘camouflaged politics’ of the war on terror where immigration controls and border checks are seen as protecting the nation, such measures hide from view the fact that border controls are largely ideological. As processes of displacement have only increased post-9/11, the lives of migrants moving away from war zones, poverty, dispossession and displacement and towards their hopes for new homes and livelihoods, have been made more vulnerable to every sort of abuse in the nationalized spaces they move to. Their border crossings are now more fraught with danger. Named as potential terrorists if they fit a certain racialized profile, their experiences of homelessness are more profound. Is there less terror in the world as a result of these border panics? Hardly.
—  Nandita Sharma, “White Nationalism, Illegality and Imperialism: Border Controls as Ideology” ((En)Gendering the War on Terror, 2006)
In trying to understand, and challenge, the contemporary, postmodern expansion of capitalist globalization, those struggling for social justice need to pay attention to the significance not only of racist practices but also nationalist ones. This would help us uncover the territorial dimension of moral panics concerning citizenship and (im)migration. We need to question and transform ideological renderings of space where only members of the ‘nation’ (with all of the historically racialized, gendered and sexualized criteria for 'belonging’) are able to claim managerial rights over what happens there. Relationships shaped by such spatial politics are those of apartheid: each culture in its place or, perhaps most precisely, each Othered culture kept in its place while dominant ones traverse all manufactured borders. In other words, we need to challenge the war on terror.
—  Nandita Sharma, “White Nationalism, Illegality and Imperialism: Border Controls as Ideology” ((En)Gendering the War on Terror, 2006)