This thesis analyses the field of social relations affected by
the international
border between Australia and Papua New Guinea, focussed primarily
on the
people from the Papua New Guinea side. The location of the border
and
conditions for interaction across it are set down in the Torres
Strait Treaty, which
contains provisions allowing people defined as “traditional
inhabitants” of the
border region “free movement” across the border when they are
engaged in
“traditional activities.”
I argue that the interpretation and enforcement of the
traditional inhabitant
provisions of the Torres Strait Treaty by agents of the
respective nation states
has generated a paradox in its application: the deployment of the
notion of
“tradition” in the classification of subjects and the
regulation and restriction of
their activities depends on a conceptualisation of the individual
person and
presuppositions about the nature of sociality that are at odds
with the dominant
form of sociality among the people whose traditions are invoked.
Over the years since the Treaty came into effect there has been
an increasing
discrepancy in the material standard of living on opposite sides
of the border,
and Torres Strait Islanders are now relatively affluent by
comparison with their
Papuan neighbours. This change in economic conditions has made
the prospect
of visiting the Torres Strait Islands increasingly attractive for
Papuans, but the
government response has been to narrow the categorical
interpretation of the
traditional inhabitant provisions so that they function to
exclude many people
who believe they should be classified as traditional inhabitants.
This has created
conditions for competition and rivalry between Papua New Guinean
groups over
inclusion in and exclusion from the traditional inhabitant
category; and
contestation over the interpretation of what counts as a
traditional activity, with
a central role played by agents of the Australian state
