Rhetoric versus reality: rogue states in interstate conflict / by Mary Caprioli and Peter F Trumbore
Material type:
TextPublication details: 2005Subject(s):
In:
The Journal of Conflict Resolution Vol 49 No 5, October 2005, pp.770-791Summary: Describes the results of empirical testing of the commonly held assumptions about rogue states - namely that they represent aggressive threats to international peace and security. Identifies those states that since 1980 have consistently been described as rogues by policy makers, as well as other states with similar characteristics that have not been said to qualify as rogues. Concludes that these states are no more likley to become involved in military conflict, to initiate conflict or make first use of force than non-rogue states. Identifies implications for American foreign policy, which has treated the rogue state concept as one of its principle concerns.
| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Date due | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Journal Article | Mindef Library & Info Centre On-Shelf | XX(19123.1) (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Not for loan | 19123-1001 |
Browsing Mindef Library & Info Centre shelves, Shelving location: On-Shelf Close shelf browser (Hides shelf browser)
Describes the results of empirical testing of the commonly held assumptions about rogue states - namely that they represent aggressive threats to international peace and security. Identifies those states that since 1980 have consistently been described as rogues by policy makers, as well as other states with similar characteristics that have not been said to qualify as rogues. Concludes that these states are no more likley to become involved in military conflict, to initiate conflict or make first use of force than non-rogue states. Identifies implications for American foreign policy, which has treated the rogue state concept as one of its principle concerns.
There are no comments on this title.