Reshaping Rogue States: Preemption, Regime Change, and US Policy toward Iran, Iraq, and North Korea
Alexander T.J. Lennon, Camille Eiss
MIT Press, Jul 9, 2004 - Political Science - 392 pages
An analysis of the policies of preemption and regime change as well as an examination of US policy options for dealing with each country in the "axis of evil."
In January 2002, President George W. Bush declared Iran, Iraq, and North Korea constituents of an "axis of evil." US strategy toward each of these countries has clearly varied since, yet similar issues and policy options have emerged for US relations with all three. Reshaping Rogue States seeks to improve our understanding of Iran, Iraq, and North Korea as well as of current and future policy options to combat the threats these nations pose. The book's comprehensive analysis of preemption and regime change debates the circumstances under which each policy might be justified or legal under international law. Prominent strategists and policymakers consider alternatives to preemption—including prevention, counterproliferation, and cooperative security—and draw conclusions from efforts to bring about regime change in the past. Reshaping Rogue States also reviews the differing policy challenges presented by each so-called axis member. Specifically, it considers how the United States might strike a balance with North Korea through multilateral negotiations; the changes within Iran that call for changes in US policy; and the dilemmas the United States faces in post-Saddam Iraq, including continuing insurgency, instability, and the feasibility of democracy.
Regardless of the extent to which the Israeli strike was justified and successful (
and in this author's opinion, the Israelis had ample cause for concern about the
military use or misuse of the Osirak facility), the UN Security Council (including
Furthermore, this reassertion of multilateralism is not exclusively European, as
evidenced by Mexico's role in the Security Council negotiations leading to
Resolution 1441 concerning Iraq. The net result of this hardening of the
istration to operate within the constraints of a Security Council compromise or
face the political consequences of the kind of unilateral behavior most U.S. allies
and partners have traditionally disavowed. How international rules are made ...
In a sense, the Security Council's negotiation of Resolution 1441 on Iraq in
November 2002 may have served as a successful example of such a process. A
case-specific resolution, however, cannot sufficiently substitute for bilateral or ...
A war against Iraq on the basis of Security Council Resolution 1441 would
belong to the realm of enforcement, not prevention or preemption. 4. See Vice
President Dick Cheney, speech to the Veterans of the Korean War, San Antonio,
What people are saying - Write a review
When to Target Leaders q Catherine Lotrionte
Toward a Grand Bargain with North Korea Michael OHanlon
Playing for the Long
A Blueprint for U S Policy toward a Unified Korea
Confronting Terrorism Gary Sick 246 Debating Irans Nuclear Aspirations Shahram Chubin and Robert S Litwak
Getting Past Stereotypes and Mythology Mahmood Sariolghalam
IRAQ AFTER SADDAM
Iraqs Neighbors Interests Jon B Alterman
Other editions - View all
North Korea in Quotation: A Worldwide Dictionary, 1948-2004
No preview available - 2005
The New Iranian Leadership: Ahmadinejad, Terrorism, Nuclear Ambition, and ...
Yonah Alexander,Milton M. Hoenig
No preview available - 2007