Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #25428 in Books
• Published on: 2000-09-01
• Original language: English
• Binding: Paperback
• 260 pages

Synopsis
Noam Chomsky argues that, contrary to popular perception, the real 'rogue' states in the world today are not the dictator-led developing countries we hear about in the news, but the United States and its allies. He challenges the legal and humanitarian reasons given to justify intervention in global conflicts in order to reveal the West's shameless reliance on the rule of force. He examines NATO's intervention in Kosovo, the crisis in East Timor, and US involvement in the Middle East, Southeast Asia and Latin America. Chomsky relies on both historical context and recently released government documents to trace the paths of self-interest and domination that fuelled these violent regional conflicts. Throughout, he reveals the United States's increasingly open dismissal of the United Nations and international legal precedent in justifying its motives and actions. Characteristically incisive and provocative, Chomsky demonstrates that the rule of law has been reduced to farce.

Customer Reviews

Of perhaps limited value to non-Americans
In a rare and helpful moment of concision, Chomsky summarises his argument to this book in the first paragraph of the opening chapter. The term rogue state, he observes, has two meanings: either it denotes a state judged recalcitrant or "undesirable" to world powers; or those very world powers who (rightly) deem themselves beyond the capability of international institutions to punish. In short, by the second definition, the USA is the world's most obvious rogue state. So far, so hoopy.

What follows is a 200 page, lucidly argued, well-documented (if highly selective), infuriatingly footnoted rant against US aggression. It documents US interventions in world affairs from the time of the founding fathers (Cuban aggression) through early empire building (in the Philippines and the Caribbean), the cold war (Indonesia, Indochina, South America and Africa) to the modern world (Iraq, the Middle East and Israel). In all of these cases, Chomsky argues, the USA has acted in its narrow self-interest, often in flagrant defiance of international law, although sometimes under the mask of righteousness or as a kind of "global policeman". Claims of US benevolence have been undermined by support for a series of brutal dictators (Suharto, Duvalier, Mobutu, Pinochet, Saddam Hussein, etc etc).

This is all very well in so far as it goes. What Chomsky conspicuously fails to do in Rogue States is answer the more interesting question of why all this happens, and even more interesting, what can be done about it. Frankly, while most non-Americans will be shocked by the evidence, few will be surprised by the central premise.

What is needed, and lacking, in Rogue States, something that would turn it from a polemic into a political tract, is some kind of comparative evidence. How does the US Empire stack up against its progenitors? Is the USA doing anything radically different from, say, the British Empire, the Spanish Empire, or event the Athenian League? In short, is the US simply doing what un-externally constrained world powers do, not because they are malicious or evil, but simply because they can. What does this say for developing political superpowers such as China (or even Islam)? Has democracy changed the rules of this game? Indeed, what does democracy mean in a world where sovereignty is national but influence and power is global? None of these questions are answered by Rogue States although, to be fair, on the last point, Chomsky would probably refer us to Manufacturing Consent.

Even as polemic, Rogue States has problems. The most acute of these is self-definition. Chomsky defines away the first version of rogue state as being a product of US propaganda. He focuses on the second definition. Yet, objectively, many states exist which the international community might want to "do something about". Many might, indeed, be those client US states Chomsky rails against. In the current real politic of international law (which pretty much means the weak toe the line and the strong do what they like) how can powerful states be prevented from pursuing their own agenda against the interests of the weak? Chomsky's answer is typically both true and unhelpful: checks and balances have to come from the within powerful states, which leads us back to Manufacturing Consent. Unfortunately, this is possibly Chomsky's weakest work.

So this is, then, a highly enjoyable expression of what most liberal Europeans instinctively believe. As a political thesis it may have limited value, but it will, at least, allow you to sound cool and well informed in discussion.... except for one thing. Chomsky has a disconcerting, nay infuriating, habit of referencing primary sources through his other works. This makes it decidedly difficult to poach his learning, unless you're planning an exhaustive trip through the Chomsky cannon.

I'm giving it four stars though. It may be aimed firmly at the American audience, but it is entertaining, which is more than can be said for most political science books.

A Literary "Pandora's Box"
This book tells us what we don't want to hear, but really should. It tells us that instead of the West being the source of benevolence and justice in the world, the West - specifically the United States - is exactly the monster that we thought we were trying to destroy when we sent Iraq back to the Stone Age in 1991.

Unilateralist, divisive, selfish, power-hungry, exploitative, deceitful. Chomsky turns our default assumptions on their heads by showing the true nature of the rogue state whose people dress like us, talk a bit like us and enjoy team sports like us. He systematically takes semantic aspects of the conventional "rogue state" and applies them to the actions of the USA in global situations ranging from Vietnam, to Iraq, to Indonesia, and so on almost ad infinitum.

I challenge all but the most set in their right-wing beliefs to read this book and not be affected by the grand scope and persuasive argument of Chomsky close to his best.

This book could only be improved (in my very humble opinion!) if he were to write a new chapter about how we have exceeded the rogue state in ourselves by going into Iraq with a rather tenuous excuse, and the backlash that has and will continue to ensue.

Be careful - you may not like what you hear.
This is a dangerous book. This is a book that is terrifying to read. This is a book that goes against eveything most westerners stand for.
The problem is, due to the impeccable references and neverending bibliography, you cannot fault Chomsky's unerring, deadly accurate logic.
In this book, Chomsky indictes world superpowers in what is truly a WMD: Facts and logic. Not only does he blow the lid off countless episodes most western leaders would like to forget, but also shows how they have (and will) happen again and again until someone takes notice.
Many call this book left wing, and I think is a fair assumption. However, two other factors swayed me into loving this book:
1) Most of the previous material you would have read/seen (news, papers, articles) will be right wing biased. This merely evens the playing field.
2) Just because it is left wing, doesn't mean it is wrong.

You need an open mind and also be able to accept that most aspects of the politics we all see are through rose-tinted glasses. For crystal clear vision, grab a copy.