"ROGUE STATES"
by Noam Chomsky
(activist, writer, and professor of
linguistics at Massachusetts Institute
of Technology [M.I.T.], where he has
taught since 1955)
from Acts of Aggression,
Policing "Rogue" States,
[Copyright © 1999 in the U.S.A. and
Internationally by Edward W. Said,
Noam Chomsky and Ramsey Clark.
All rights reserved.]


"The concept of "rogue states" plays a pre-eminent role today in policy planning and analysis... But discussion (has been and continues to be) kept within rigid bounds that exclude(d) the obvious answer: the United States and Britain should act in accord with their laws and treaty obligations(!)

"The relevant legal framework is formulated in the Charter of the United Nations, a "solemn treaty" recognized as the foundation of international law and world order, and (is,) under the U.S. Constitution, "the supreme law of the land(!)"

"The Charter states that(,) "The (U.N.) Security Council shall determine the existence of any threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression, and shall make recommendations, or decide what measures shall be taken in accordance with Articles 41 and 42," which detail the preferred "measures NOT involving the use of armed force" and permit the Security Council to take further action if IT finds such measures necessary to maintain international peace and security(!)" Apart from these exceptions, member states "shall REFRAIN in their international relations from the threat or use of force(!)"

"There are legitimate ways to react to the many threats to world peace. If Iraq's neighbors feel threatened, they can approach the Security Council to authorize appropriate measures to respond to the threat. If the United States and Britain feel threatened, they can do the same. BUT NO STATE HAS THE AUTHORITY TO MAKE ITS OWN DETERMINATIONS ON THESE MATTERS AND TO ACT AS IT CHOOSES; the United States and Britain would have NO such authority even if their hands were clean, (which is) hardly the case(!)

"Outlaw states do not accept these conditions: Saddam's Iraq, for example, OR THE UNITED STATES(!)... The Security Council unanimously endorsed (U.N. Secretary-General Kofi) Annan's agreement, rejecting U.S./U.K. demands that it authorize their use of force in the event of non-compliance. The resolution warned of the "severest consequences," but with no further specification(s). In the crucial final paragraph, the Council "decides, in accordance with its responsibilities under the (U.N.) Charter, to remain actively seized of the matter, in order to ensure implementation of this resolution and to ensure peace and security in the (Middle-Eastern) area." The Council, NO ONE ELSE; in accordance with the Charter(!)

"The facts were (very) clear and unambiguous(!)... "It HAS to be the Security Council who determines when to use armed force," the Ambassador of Costa Rica declared, expressing the position of the Security Council(!)... "And the other nations of the world have NOT assigned Washington (D.C.) the right to decide when, where and how their interests should be served {Ronald Steel}(!)"

"The Constitution (of the United States) DOES happen to provide such mechanisms, namely, by declaring valid treaties "the supreme law of the land," particularly the most fundamental of them, the U.N. Charter(!) It further authorizes (the U.S.) Congress to "define and punish... offenses against the law of nations," UNDERGIRDED BY THE CHARTER IN THE CONTEMPORARY ERA(!). It is, furthermore, a bit of an understatement to say that other nations "have not assigned Washington the right"; THEY HAVE FORCEFULLY DENIED IT THAT RIGHT, following the {at least rhetorical} lead of Washington, which largely crafted the Charter(!)....

"Contempt for the rule of law is deeply rooted in U.S. practice and intellectual culture(!)... The open contempt for Article 51 (of the U.N. Charter, and the "creative interpretation of [same]" to supposedly justify the U.S.'s unilateral decisions to exercise armed force against other nations) is particularly revealing(!)... The United States proceeded to define "aggression" to include "political warfare, or subversion" {by someone else, that is (even though the U.S. does it all the time, and has done so for decades---it's supposedly okay for them to do; but it is definitely not okay for any other country to do, which is a gross and intolerable double standard)}(!)....

"The record lends considerable support to the concern widely voiced about "rogue states" that are dedicated to the rule of force, acting in the "national interest" as defined by domestic power; MOST OMINOUSLY, ROGUE STATES THAT ANOINT THEMSELVES GLOBAL JUDGE AND EXECUTIONER (LIKE THE UNITED STATES)(!)....

"....A secret 1995 study of the Strategic Command, which is responsible for the strategic nuclear arsenal, outlines the basic thinking (of the United States government at the present time). Released through the Freedom of Information Act, the study, Essentials of Post-Cold War Deterrence, "shows how the United States shifted its deterrent strategy from the defunct Soviet Union to so-called rogue states such as Iraq, Libya, Cuba and North Korea," A(ssociated) P(ress) reports. The study advocates that the United States exploit its nuclear arsenal to portray itself as "irrational and vindictive ([re]vengeful) if its vital interests are attacked." That "should be a part of the national persona we project to all adversaries," particularly the "rogue states." "It hurts to portray ourselves as too fully rational and coolheaded," let alone committed to such silliness as international law and treaty obligations. "The fact that some elements" of the U.S. government "may appear to be potentially 'out of control' can be beneficial to creating and reinforcing fears and doubts within the minds of an adversary's decision makers." (But it isn't working, is it?!) The report resurrects Nixon's "madman theory": our enemies should recognize that we are crazed and unpredictable, with extraordinary destructive force at out command, so they will bend to our will in fear. The concept was apparently devised in Israel in the 1950s by the governing Labor Party, whose leaders "preached in favor of acts of madness," Prime Minister Moshe Sharett records in his diary, warning that "we will go crazy" {"nishtagea"} if crossed, a "secret weapon" aimed in part against the United States, not considered sufficiently reliable at the time. In the hands of the world's sole superpower, which regards itself as an outlaw state and is subject to few constraints from elites within, that stance poses no small problem for the world(!)....

"The criteria are fairly clear: a "rogue state" is not simply a criminal state, but one that defies the orders of the powerful (like the U.S. government does)---who are, of course, (supposedly) exempt(!)....

"These are tendencies of considerable import, relating to the background concerns that motivate U.S. policy in the (Arab) region: its insistence, since World War II, on controlling the world's major energy reserves (at the expense of virtually every other nation in the world)(!) As many have observed, in the Arab world there is growing (remember, this was written in 1998, three years before the Arab-terrorist attacks on the U.S.) fear and resentment of the long-standing Israel-Turkey(-United States) alliance (and others)... now greatly strengthened (as well as other issues which have built resentment among the greater Arab "world", and brought about the attacks on the U.S. on September 11, 2001)(!)....

"The respite (since the Iraq affair[s]) is temporary(!) (How's that for a prophetic statement on the part of Noam Chomsky that things were going to get worse as they have?!) It offers (offered?) opportunities to citizens of the warrior states (including the U.S. in particular) to bring about changes of consciousness and commitment that could make a difference in the not too distant future(!)" (Of course, Mr. Chomsky did NOT mean changes in consciousness and commitment in the wrong direction(s), leading to the U.S. further provoking and bringing 9-11-01 on themselves and our country; but what he DID mean was changes in consciousness and commitment in the right direction(s), that very well could have prevented the terrible events that occurred then, and will no doubt continue to occur as the U.S. government continues to escalate their provocations of the Middle East and the world at large!) [({Words and/or emphasis added by me.})]


[Further notes by me: Please get a hold of and read this publication for yourself, to take notice of the many flagrant examples of human rights abuses by the United States government for over fifty years! The U.S. government subverts democracy all over the world, including in the U.S., while claiming to "Americans" that it is murdering millions of innocent people all over the world for the sake of preserving our democracy and/or bringing democracy to them! What a load of crap! Please don't believe it! The U.S. government is not justified in doing whatever it pleases without the authorization(s) of the United Nations General Assembly, the U.N. Security Council, and/or the World Court! The Truth is, the U.S. government is taking away U.S. citizens' inalienable right(s) to think for themselves, and to speak out against their tyranny(ies), which it is our God-given right and duty to do!]