The current research on Borders and Boundaries in the Middle East lacks strong theroetical framework. The study of borders that emerged as a major field of research in the aftermath of the fall of the Berlin wall has shifted from a territorial focus on dividing lines to a socio-cultural perspective including discursive practices and social perceptions of borders. New approaches to border studies stress the interest to deepen and widen the scope of analysis by focusing on borderlands and on processes of bordering to apprehend several dimensions of border spaces (Popescu, 2012). Drawing on this tradition, this paper intends to provide three analytical tools to explore and discuss border issues. Firstly, the notion of bordering captures the changing face of borders, implies the study of the social space of the borderland, its process and context, and involves all types of actors, institutions as well as companies, individuals and all social groups involved in the conduct of “borderwork” (Rumford, 2012). Bordering is a means of ordering (Albert & al., 2001) and also of othering: as Henk Van Houtum & Ton Van Naerssen (2002: 134) remind, “making others through a territorial fixing of order is intrinsically connected to our present image of borders”. The three processes of bordering/ordering/othering thus appear clearly linked to a reflection on territory, identity and sovereignty. Secondly, borders perceived as networks capture the spatial nature of these border-making developments through the label “networked borders” (Walter, 2004; Rumford, 2006) describing the dispersion of borders throughout societies and re-creating a network form spanning over several states. People and goods are checked and scrutinized before they reach the state border and after they enter the territory, the border becoming embedded in the flow (Sassen 2006). Among the hotspots where they can be observed are the refugee camps, ‘in-between places’ where people’s status is purposefully kept undetermined. Thirdly, it is important to refer to the notion of borderscapes as it provide analysts with a powerful tool to uncover the individuals capacity to shape the border/land and propose a counter-definition based on their status, political or religious affiliation, etc. Following Brambilla’s conceptual framework (2014), borderscaping practices are constructing (bordering) deconstructing (de-bordering) and reconstructing (re-bordering) an alternative border imaginary shaped by a “community” in the sense of Rajaram & Grundy-Warr (2007).