Redefining the Rogues
The United States government applies the term “rogue nation” or “rogue state” to countries it considers a danger to world peace. The present members of the club are Cuba, Syria, Sudan, Iran, and North Korea. Three other nations previously found themselves associated with the term – Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya. Those three only came off the list as a result of violent armed conflict and/or our continued presence as behavior managers within their borders.
Are there other ways to bring these countries in line with our perception of a proper global community? Is it our place to determine who the good guys and the bad guys are on our big, blue playground?
U.S. opposition to these countries is usually expressed as concern over both their violations of basic human rights and adoption of totalitarian systems of government that exclude democratic processes. There is no question that these particular concerns are justified. Any citizen of these nations expressing dissent in any form is subject to swift imprisonment, or worse, with little to no expectation of fair and unbiased judicial process. On this count, the United States is morally obligated to do everything within its power to protect the rights of human beings around the globe.
The issue becomes problematic, though, when one examines the list of nations in which this type of oppression exists. That list runs longer than the list of nations considered rogue.
If America’s true concern is the protection of the rights of individuals across the globe, shouldn’t the list also include China? The U.S. and China have a long history of disagreement concerning human rights, and a long history of diplomatic wrangling and posturing concerning those rights, but China is not identified as a rogue state. We handle our relationship with them very delicately, dreading the dire financial consequences probably more than the threat of military combat.
Saudi Arabia is treated as a close and valuable ally, but women in that country are treated as second class at best, subhuman at worst. There is no room for political or religious dissent, particularly since their politics and religion are intertwined. Sentences of beheadings and amputations are doled out by Saudi courts for crimes such as robbery, adultery, and sorcery. Yet Saudi Arabia is not a rogue state. Too rich with oil for us to not remain friendly.
The nation of Turkey has a continuing problem with human rights violations against the Kurdish population. Though officially protected by law, prominent Kurds have endured two decades of unsolved murders, disappearances, and extrajudicial killings in extremely disproportionate numbers to their population share. Turkey is also often cited for the inhumane conditions of its prisons and their restriction of avenues of free speech. Turkey is not identified as a rogue state. They are a strategic military ally for the U.S., who uses airfields within the country to launch air strikes against middle eastern nations.
Israel, a greatly desired land among contentiously divided people, and a nuclear power to boot, keeps close ties to the United States. While Palestinian aggression against Israelis is not to be tolerated, Israeli acts against Palestinians in the Occupied Territories must also lead to direct accountability and recognition of the state as a violator of human rights.
Pakistan has been treated as a vital ally over the past decade, but continues practices perpetuating human rights violations. Shoddy elections, religious discrimination, and “honor killings” against those violating tradition are treated as commonplace in Pakistan. Perhaps with the death of Osama bin Laden the U.S. will take a tougher stance against these abuses, but Pakistan’s nuclear power and volatile relationship with India casts doubt on that possibility.
According to the State Department’s website, the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor “takes consistent positions concerning past, present, and future abuses,” and holds abusers accountable for past actions. How does our increasingly unbalanced economic relationship with China hold them accountable? How does our “look the other way” approach in Saudi Arabia demand accountability? It seems America’s designation of rogue states is based more on value to U.S. interests, or the lack thereof, than a true desire to rectify human rights abuses.
What of the U.S. itself? Though our human rights are guaranteed by our Constitution, our government has shown a willingness to void those rights when it deems necessary. If they can be removed, they aren’t truly considered “rights” by our government, are they? Vito de la Cruz’s recent piece on RedBrownandBlue.com discussed some historical violations, illustrating we still haven’t learned from our own past. If we truly believe Jefferson’s assertion that “all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness,” why do we not remember those words when we come up with special rules for “enemy combatants” or destroy families in shows of military superiority? Are they not human because they are not American?
How do we graduate the rogue nations? How do we elevate them from offenders to allies if they have no material value to our interests as a nation? Is it money? If the regimes in control of these nations are motivated primarily by power and greed, could we possibly institute revolutionary change simply by cutting a check? Could we buy islands, and persuade dictators to abandon their seats of power for a tropical oasis? Cut them a check (probably much cheaper than the multi-billion dollar cost of military action) and send them to their own land, where they can remain wealthy and in control for the rest of their lives while turning over democratic rule of their former nations to millions of formerly oppressed citizens.
It’s an idea, but probably not a workable one.
We really need a clarified and uniform foreign policy. We need to state emphatically that human rights are inalienable and non-negotiable, or we must drop the pretense and admit that human rights are secondary to our economic or military strategy. We need not label nations with terms of our own design to express our dissatisfaction, we must simply act in accordance with our principles. If we know what we stand for, say what we stand for, and stand for what we believe without exception, our enemies and our allies will know themselves without question. The rogues will be self-identified.
The opinions expressed in this post and throughout RedBrownandBlue.com are intended to encourage civil discussion and invite well-reasoned alternatives. To join in, please visit our Contact Us page and drop us a line. Your contribution may be highlighted as a selected response and posted to the site at a later date.
Jake Negovan drives Red Brown and Blue to be an outlet for progressive political opinion that leads to the betterment of life for the real, multicultural population of the U.S. and the rest of the world. His columns address the issues faced by our country as we continue growing toward a society of equality. More about Jake can be found on the web at jakejots.com or on Twitter@jakenegovan.
