| Revision as of 13:46, 15 December 2005 editInit~enwiki (talk | contribs)170 editsm Typo← Previous edit | Revision as of 00:59, 30 December 2005 edit undoDschor (talk | contribs)811 edits fix linkNext edit → | ||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
| As the United States 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. Based on formal (lacking U.S. interests) definition, part of the critics accuse the U.S. of meeting the criteria, and thus being a rogue state itself. Another stated reason is the comparison of U.S. foreign policy with that of states it considers "rogue" with regard of having same sort of brutality and capriciousness. | As the United States 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. Based on formal (lacking U.S. interests) definition, part of the critics accuse the U.S. of meeting the criteria, and thus being a rogue state itself. Another stated reason is the comparison of U.S. foreign policy with that of states it considers "rogue" with regard of having same sort of brutality and capriciousness. | ||
| Example of these arguments can be seen in the book '']''. | Example of these arguments can be seen in the book '']''. | ||
| In the last six months of the ], the term "rogue state" was temporarily replaced with the term "state of concern," however, the ] has returned to the earlier term. The U.S. government perceives the threat posed by these states as justifying its ] and military initiatives, as in the case of ] programs, which are held to be grounded in the concern that these states will not be deterred by the ]. | In the last six months of the ], the term "rogue state" was temporarily replaced with the term "state of concern," however, the ] has returned to the earlier term. The U.S. government perceives the threat posed by these states as justifying its ] and military initiatives, as in the case of ] programs, which are held to be grounded in the concern that these states will not be deterred by the ]. | ||
Revision as of 00:59, 30 December 2005
Rogue state is a term applied by the U.S. government to states it considers as threatening the world's peace. This means meeting certain criteria usually expressed as:
- being ruled by authoritarian regimes severely restricting human rights
- accused of sponsoring terrorism
- seeking to proliferate weapons of mass destruction.
As the United States 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. Based on formal (lacking U.S. interests) definition, part of the critics accuse the U.S. of meeting the criteria, and thus being a rogue state itself. Another stated reason is the comparison of U.S. foreign policy with that of states it considers "rogue" with regard of having same sort of brutality and capriciousness. Example of these arguments can be seen in the book Rogue Nation.
In the last six months of the Clinton administration, the term "rogue state" was temporarily replaced with the term "state of concern," however, the Bush administration has returned to 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.
In late 1990s U.S. officials considered as "rogue states" North Korea, Iraq, Iran (so called "Axis of Evil"), Afghanistan and Libya. The U.S. invasion of Afghanistan removed the country from the list, and Iraq followed suit after the U.S.-led 2003 invasion of Iraq. Libya achieved success through diplomacy and now is also not considered in the list. North Korea can change its status based on outcome of the Six-party talks. Iran is still considered a "rogue state" by U.S. officials, and its status hardly can improve given current Western World-reaction to the development of Iran's nuclear program.
Further Reading
- William Blum, Rogue State: A Guide to the World's Only Superpower ISBN 1567511945
- Noam Chomsky, Rogue States: The Rule of Force in World Affairs ISBN 0896086119
External link
- Prevent Our Enemies from Threatening Us, Our Allies, and Our Friends with Weapons of Mass Destruction - Official White House statement
- Global Rogue State This zmag.org article uses the dictionary specification of 'Rogue' and factually compares small rogue states with 'the big one.'
- The Zmag site also has many Chomsky articles online, as a substitute to the book mentioned above.
- 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)