(this essay is NOT as long as it seems - much of the word count is the 30 works cited) Statement of the problem 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 destructions Rogue states have been applied to a number of nations, often under the control of authoritarian regimes suspected of promoting terrorism, proliferation of unconventional weapons, or both. Nation States such as Cuba, Iran, Sudan, Syria, Pakistan and North Korea currently are considered “Rogue States” and pose as a dangerous threat to the United States and International security. International Security consists of the measures taken by nations and international organizations, such as the United Nations, to ensure mutual survival and safety . These measures include military action and diplomatic agreements such as treaties and conventions. In International Relations, it has been established that there are a set system in place that govern what and how states act. The decisions that these states make are based solely on the premise or personal power and international respect. The general consensus in international relations is that in a world plagued with the fear of nuclear annihilation states act accordingly, simply put the states in question choose to deter and with this deterrence, maintain their international stance. The problem however as it relates to Rogue States in International Relations is there are selective states which choose to be “rogue” and challenge the hegemonic. For the U.S. gover... ... middle of paper ... ...s Christel Lane and Reinhard Bachmann The British Journal of Sociology, Vol. 48, No. 2 (Jun., 1997), pp. 226-254 A Nontrivial Example of Application of the Nielsen Fixed-Point Theory to Differential Systems: Problem of Jean Leray Jan Andres Proceedings of the American Mathematical Society, Vol. 128, No. 10 (Oct., 2000), pp. 2921-2931 Information Systems in Treaty Regimes Xinyuan Dai World Politics, Vol. 54, No. 4 (Jul., 2002), pp. 405-436 Risk Aversion in International Relations Theory Barry O'Neill International Studies Quarterly, Vol. 45, No. 4 (Dec., 2001), pp. 617-640 On International Migration and International Relations Myron Weiner Population and Development Review, Vol. 11, No. 3 (Sep., 1985), pp. 441-455 Systemic Approaches to Middle East International Relations F. Gregory Gause III International Studies Review, Vol. 1, No. 1 (Spring, 1999), pp. 11-31
The Middle East has historically rebuked Western influence during their process of establishing independence. When Britain and France left the Middle East after World War II, the region saw an unprecedented opportunity to establish independent and self-sufficient states free from the Western influence they had felt for hundreds of years. In an attempt to promote nationalistic independence, the states of the region immediately formed the League of Arab States in 1945. The League recognized and promoted the autonomy of its members and collaborated in regional opposition against the West until 1948 when Israel declared independence. Israel represented then and now an intrusive Western presence in the Arab world. The ongoing Arab-Israeli conflict typifies this cultural antagonism. The Cold War refocused attention to the Middle East as a site of economic and strategic importance for both sides, yet the two hegemons of the Cold War now needed to recognize the sovereignty of the Middle Eastern states. With their statehood and power cemented, the Middle Easte...
In the novel War and Peace In the Middle East, author Avi Shlaim argues that Arab nations have been unable to escape the post-Ottoman syndrome. In particular he describes how the various powers inside and outside the region have failed to produce peace. While some of Shlaim's arguments hinder the message, I agree with his overall thesis that the Middle East problems were caused and prolonged by the failure of both powers and superpowers to take into account the regional interests of the local states.
Frieden, Jeffry A., David A. Lake, and Kenneth A. Schultz. World Politics. New York: W.W. Norton &, 2013. Print.
Foreign policy and Immigration since 1945”. Threatened Peoples, Threatened Borders: World Migration Policy. Eds. Michael Teitelbaum and Myron Weiner. New York: Columbia University, 1995. p.123-124.
Mingst, K. A. (2011). Essentials of international relations. (5th ed., p. 81). New York, NY: W.W. Norton & Company.
Mingst, Karen A. Essentials of International Relations. New York : W.W. Norton & Co., 2008.
Shiraev, Eric B., and Vladislav M. Zubok. International Relations. New York: Oxford University Press, 2014.
Macionis. J, J. Plummer, K. (2005). Sociology. A global Introduction. Pearson Education Limited. Essex. (UK) Third Edition.
Yapp, Malcolm. The Near East since the First World War: A History to 1995. London: Longman, 1996. Print.
Stephen. D. Krasner is an International Relations Professor at Stanford University and a former director of Policy Planning at the United States Department of State. He is a neorealist who focuses on sovereignty and state structure, international regimes and weak state stabilisation. His theory is the product of contemporary times and projects a broad trajectory of ups and downs in the international state structure embedded with the chain of circumstances within the rigid framework of international relationships and effectively and efficiently analyses the reasons and remedies for the current state of being of the states. His major contributions are Sovereignty-organised Hypocrisy, Structural Conflict-Third world against the global liberalism and Defending National Interest.
Krasner, Stephen D. “Structural Causes and Regimes Consequences: Regimes as Intervening Variables.” International Organization. Vol. 36, No. 2, International Regimes (Spring, 1982), 185-205.
Willcox, Walter Francis, and Imre Ferenczi. International Migrations. New York: Nat. Bureau of Economic Research, 1929. Print.
Levitsky, Steven, and Lucan Way. "Linkage versus Leverage: Rethinking the International Dimension of Regime Change." Comparative Politics 38.4 (2006): 379-400. Print.
Roskin, M., & Berry, N. (2010). IR: The new world of international relations: 2010 edition (8th ed.). San Francisco, CA: Longman/Pearson Education.
Different theories of international relations seek to best explain and predict the whole spectrum of international relations. Some theories are better than others, if one wants to fully understand the spectrum of international relations. The Reductionist theory and the Structural theory both seek to predict the outcomes of international relations, however each leads to a different level and approach of explaining states behavior and ambitions in international relations. When studying and expanding the two theories to its full potential one can conclude as does Kenneth Waltz that one theory is better than the other overall in explaining I.R., this theory being the structural theory in that it explains what the Reductionist theory cannot.