Ghost in the Genevan borderscape! On the symbolic significance of an ‘invisible’ border

The main argument of this paper is that the construction and transformation of national borders and, by extension, of cross-border spaces, is more than just a ‘political’ act. It is part of a complex and contested process of symbolisation predicated on the articulation between political projects, everyday experience and collective memories. In order to broaden our understanding of the meaning-making capacity of borders in the process of cross-border region-building, this study looks at what happens when the border is apparently not the object of a particular event, public space, monument or other material form of enacting cross-border regionness. The hypothesis adopted in this study states that the logic of symbolisation is actually inescapable. Instead of simply considering the absence of border symbolism (i.e., a symbolic void), we plead here in favour of strategies of implicit symbolisation which rest on the staging of borders’ functional devaluation and dematerialization (i.e., a symbolism of emptiness or an ‘absent presence’, that is to say that the meaning depends on what is not there). In order to support this hypothesis, it is necessary to explain the motivation of the actors who drive cross-border cooperation and stage the border as a symbol of emptiness. Some of the questions that arise in the context are: What are the functions and meanings of a border characterized by its ‘erasure’? How is this ‘invisibility’ of the border invested in cross-border imaginaries and narratives? Finally, to what extent does such a symbolic recoding contribute to promoting a cross-border regional project and the formation of a sense of belonging that transcends the border?

In order to answer these questions, this paper aims first of all at theoretically clarifying the symbolic significance of borders in a cross-border regional context. In particular, the discussion focuses on the basic mechanisms of the process of symbolisation and the importance of the historical and spatial context. The former relies on Peircean semiotics and the latter is grasped through the notion of ‘borderscape’ which emphasizes the multidimensionality of borders and their dynamic character in time and space. Thereafter, the analysis applies to the case of Greater Geneva, a cross-border cooperation initiative that aims at the development and governance of the cross-border urban agglomeration marked by the ‘erasure’ of the Franco–Swiss border. The case study analysis specifically examines the symbolisation of the border in relation to the cross-border cooperation project and how this symbolism is articulated with its societal context. The recoding of the border as ‘planned obsolescence’ through its invisibilization in the conceived space of the Greater Geneva project is brought to the fore. This symbolisation of the border by its absence also seems well articulated with the narratives of cross-border cooperation. However, the dissonance between the symbolic recoding of the border performed by the cross-border cooperation elites and the popular imagination weakens the Greater Geneva project. On the one hand, the absence of an explicit symbolisation does not promote a shared sense of belonging; for many inhabitants, the national border remains a relevant marker of national identity. On the other hand, the perceived symbolic void provides an opportunity for populist movements to promote a xenophobic discourse contesting the cooperation project and the formation of a cross-border territorial entity. Finally, the analysis concludes on the meaning of a ghostly border that seems to haunt the Greater Geneva project and what this singular example reveals as to the symbolic importance of national boundaries, especially when they are mystified.