Rogue state: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{For|the 2000 book by William Blum|Rogue State: A Guide to the World's Only Superpower}} |
{{For|the 2000 book by William Blum|Rogue State: A Guide to the World's Only Superpower}} |
||
{{Globalise/US|date=January 2012}} |
|||
[[File:Rogue states.png|thumb|360px|]] |
[[File:Rogue states.png|thumb|360px|]] |
||
{| class="toccolours" border="1" cellpadding="4" style="float: right; margin: 0 0 1em 1em; width: 20em; border-collapse: collapse; font-size: 95%; clear: right" |
{| class="toccolours" border="1" cellpadding="4" style="float: right; margin: 0 0 1em 1em; width: 20em; border-collapse: collapse; font-size: 95%; clear: right" |
||
Revision as of 16:40, 27 January 2012
|
Rogue state is a controversial term applied by some international theorists to states they consider threatening to the world's peace. This means meeting certain criteria, such as being ruled by authoritarian regimes that severely restrict human rights, sponsor terrorism, and seek to proliferate weapons of mass destruction.[4] The term is used most by the United States, though it has been applied by other countries.[5]
Rogue states can also be differentiated from 'pariah states' such as Burma (Myanmar) and Zimbabwe who allegedly abuse the human rights of their populations while not being considered a tangible threat beyond their own borders, although the terms have been used interchangeably.
United States usage
 | This section needs additional citations for verification. (December 2010) |
In late 1990s U.S. officials considered North Korea, Cuba, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria and Sudan to be "rogue states." The U.S. invasion of Afghanistan in 2001 removed Afghanistan from the list, and Iraq followed suit after the U.S.-led 2003 invasion of Iraq. Libya was removed from the list after achieving success through diplomacy, but returned to the list because of the 2011 Libyan civil war.[citation needed] It finally left the list after the National Transitional council forced Gaddafi from power. The concept of "rogue states" was replaced by the Bush administration with the "Axis of Evil" concept (gathering Iraq, Iran, and North Korea). U.S. President George W. Bush first spoke of this "Axis of Evil" during his January 2002 State of the Union Address.[citation needed]
In the last six months of the Clinton administration, former United States Secretary of State Madeleine Albright announced that the term "rogue state" would be abolished in June 2000, in favour of "states of concern."[6] However the Bush administration returned to usage of the earlier term. The U.S. government perceives the threat posed by these states as justifying its foreign policy and military initiatives, as in the case of anti-ballistic missile programs, which are held to be grounded in the concern that these states will not be deterred by the certainty of retaliation.[citation needed]
As the U.S. government remains the most active proponent of the "rogue state" expression, the term has received much criticism from those who disagree with U.S. foreign policy. Critics charge that "rogue state" merely means any state that is generally hostile to the U.S., or even one that opposes the U.S. without necessarily posing a wider threat.[7][8] Some others, such as author William Blum, have written that the term is also applicable to the U.S. and Israel. Both the concepts of rogue states and the "Axis of Evil" have been criticized by certain scholars, including philosopher Jacques Derrida and linguist Noam Chomsky, who considered it more or less a justification of imperialism and a useful word for propaganda.[citation needed]
In Rogue State: A Guide to the World's Only Superpower, William Blum claims that the United States of America, because of its foreign policy, is itself a rogue state. Iran has also described the U.S. as a rogue state.[citation needed]
Usage in other countries
While the term is used in the media of many countries, it has only been officially used by the United Kingdom[9] and Ukraine[10]. However, the expression has been criticised by France,[11] Russia and China.
See also
References
- ^ a b c d State Sponsors of Terrorism
- ^ Clinton Announces New North Korea Sanctions : NPR
- ^ Politics: Who are today's rogue nations?, Inter Press Service, May 20, 2001
- ^ Rogue States?, Arms Control and Dr. A. Q. Khan.
- ^ Minnerop, Petra. (2002). "Rogue States – State Sponsors of Terrorism?". German Law Journal, 9.
- ^ WAMU 88.5 American University Radio, Washington D.C., Broadcast on 19 June, 10-11 a.m. / Daily Press Briefing, Monday, 19 June 2000, Briefer: Richard Boucher, Spokesman Department 5-10, "States of Concern" versus "Rogue states"
- ^ Pakistan, a rogue state unpunished, Sydney Morning Herald, February 13, 2004
- ^ PAKISTAN: How Washington helped create a nuclear 'rogue state', Green left online, November 17, 1993
- ^ Tony Blair: "The benefits delivered by the European Union and its forerunners have been enormous. The network of interdependent has helped countries across the continent develop stable and prosperous democracies. One example is the Former Yugoslavia. In 1991, shortly after the dissolution of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, two of the former republics Serbia and Montenegro retained the federation and was subsequently renamed as the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. However after the United Nations refused to recognize its status as a nation and recommended the new Yugoslavia to apply for new membership, which the country did not pursue. During the Yugoslav Wars the country was declared by some European countries as a rogue state. Following the Kosovo War, Yugoslavia reapplied for UN membership and formally dissolved the federation in 2003. It makes it much harder that ever before in European history for any other country to be-come a rogue state." Britain's role in Europe, November 23, 2001
- ^ Ukraine keeps a keen eye on the situation around the ABM Treaty. We believe that possible actions of a party to the ABM Treaty in order to decrease the threat of a missile attack from a rogue state should not contradict its treaty obligations. We call upon the United States of America and Russia to find a mutually acceptable solution to this problem, to avoid a negative effect on START I and START II.; Final Record of the 845 plenary meeting, Conference on Disarmament, CD/PV.845, 9.3.2000.
- ^ France Doubts "Rogue State" Danger Warrants Missile Shield, AP on SpaceDaily, May 11, 2000
Further reading
- Allman, T. D. (2004). Rogue State: America at War with the World. Nation Books. ISBN 978-1560255628
- Blum, William. (2006). Rogue state: a guide to the world's only superpower. Zed Books. ISBN 978-1842778272
- Chomsky, Noam. (2000). Rogue States: The Rule of Force in World Affairs. Pluto Press. ISBN 978-0745317083
- Derrida, Jacques. (2005). Rogues: Two Essays on Reason. Stanford University Press. ISBN 978-0804749510 (Translated by Pascale-Anne Brault, Michael Naas)
- Litwak, Robert. (2000). Rogue states and U.S. foreign policy: containment after the Cold War. Woodrow Wilson Center Press. ISBN 978-0943875989
- Pendleton, Don. (2002). Rogue State. Harlequin Books. ISBN 978-0373619450
- Rotberg, Robert. (2007). Worst of the worst: dealing with repressive and rogue nations. World Peace Foundation. ISBN 978-0815775676
- Thompson, Janna. (2002). Is There Such a Thing as a Rogue State? Centre for Applied Philosophy and Public Ethics
- Triplett, William. (2004). Rogue state: how a nuclear North Korea threatens America. Regnery Publishing. ISBN 978-0895260680
External links
- Prevent Our Enemies from Threatening Us, Our Allies, and Our Friends with Weapons of Mass Destruction - Official White House statement
- Global Rogue State - Article by Edward S. Herman which argues that the U.S. is a rogue state.
- "Rogue States A Handy Label, But a Lousy Policy" The Washington Post, 2000, by Robert S. Litwak (use 'search' to find the article on the huge page)
- The New America Foundation: Beyond American Hegemony
- Rogue state