A rogue state has been defined as one "that puts a high priority on subverting other states and sponsoring non-conventional types of violence against them. It does not react predictably to deterrence or other tools of diplomacy and statecraft. In short, such a state requires special treatment and high levels of international pressure in order to prevent it from wrecking public order, setting off wars, and subverting whole areas of the world" [1]. This article will examine what are the commonly accepted criteria for being considered a "rogue state," the evidence required for such a classification, the implications of such a classification, and whether Pakistan is, in fact, a rogue state.

The classification of a state as "rogue" depends on a number of factors, including its perceived irrationality of decision making, its ability to jeopardize international order, state sponsorship of terrorism, and its ability or threat to attack American interests [1,2]. Because of the American primacy in world affairs, the threat to the United States and its interests is an important aspect of a state considered a "rogue." US foreign policymaking uses the "rogue" characterization to diminish the deleterious impact of such states on US and world affairs. Examples of states characterized as ‘rogues’ include Cuba, Iran, Iraq, Libya, and North Korea [1, 3]. Of the various criteria, the most important is the threat to attack American interests, or actual attacks on these interests. Iraq is a good example of how a state that displayed all the characteristics of a ‘rogue state’ was not considered one until it acted contrary to American interests [1]. In the context of attacking American interests, most rogues have pursued the route of state sponsorship of terrorism. State sponsorship of terrorism is somewhat ambiguously defined. It may involve actual involvement of state entities in terrorist activities. It may also involve the deliberate non-cooperation of state entities in preventing terrorist activities. It also includes other forms of state patronage enabling terror organizations to function within a state. Examples of these are Iran where terrorism is testified as viewed as a "legitimate tool of state policy," and where the state controls "the institutions that implement it" [3]. Syria is considered a state sponsor of terrorism although "Syrian officials have not been directly linked to a specific terrorist attack" since it "continues to provide support and safe haven" to terrorists [3]. Libya continues to be considered a state sponsor of terrorism because it permits terrorist groups to operate training camps on its soil [3]. Although terrorism against American interests receives the most press, worldwide statistics reveal that numerous other nations are also victims of terrorist acts [2].

The evidence defending such a classification is rarely, if ever, publicly presented. Even in situations where state sponsorship of terrorism has gone on trial, as in the PanAm bombing over Lockerbie, evidence is largely circumstantial [4, 5]. There have been cases where the United States has made reprisal attacks for terrorist actions against its citizens without any evidence, such as in the bombing of a pharmaceutical company in Sudan in 1998 [6].

A "rogue state" will face, as a first step, non-recognition, embargoes, sanctions, isolation and international condemnation. Sometimes, harsher steps including military action is justified on the grounds of an existing "state of war" between the United States and the rogue state, or terrorists harbored by (and therefore associated with) the rogue state. The most recent example of this has been the US attacks on Sudan and Afghanistan. The aim of these actions is primarily to bring an end to the policy of "rogueness." A secondary aim is to prevent it from implementing its policies by weakening the state [1].

Pakistan’s record in state sponsorship of terrorism is long and of broad standing. The Pakistani government has been directly involved in the planning, execution, and material support of terror groups, as well as in harboring terrorists and terrorist training camps within its territory. Most of these organizations are grounded in radical Islamic theology. There is evidence that the weapons sold to the Pakistani military were used in a 1984 hijacking of an Indian airliner [7]. Explosives, timers, grenades, and other equipment used in attacks on Indian financial centers in 1993 were similarly traced to the Pakistani military [7]. In addition to direct involvement, there is considerable evidence that Pakistan continues to provide patronage, safe harbor and training for Islamic militants. These include organizations that have conducted assassination attempts on the Egyptian leader, Hosni Mubarak, and the Egyptian Embassy [8]. Chechen fighters have admitted to being trained in Pakistan [9]. There is considerable proof that the recent hijacking of an Indian airliner was the work of organizations controlled by the Pakistani government [10]. A number of fundamentalist organizations that advocate terror have been linked to the Pakistani Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) and its top brass. These include organizations such as Harkat-ul-Ansar, Lashkar-e-Toiba, Al Badr, and Osama Bin Laden’s Al Qaeda [7]. These are all organizations that are designated as Foreign Terrorist Organizations by the United States for documented acts of terror. There are admitted to be other groups like the Lashkar-e-Toiba whose membership and leadership includes retired members of the Pakistani Military and ISI, and are documented as receiving overt material support from Gen. Musharraf’s government [11]. These organizations have conducted acts of terror across broad swathes of the world from India to Egypt and Russia to the Kenya and Tajikistan to Myanmar [8]. The United States (in the Senate Testimony of Michael Sheehan the State Department’s coordinator for counter terrorism) has admitted that there is a discernable shift in the sponsorship of terror "from Libya, Syria, … to… Pakistan." [3]. There is, therefore, clear evidence that Pakistan has sponsored and sheltered terrorist acts and organizations.

The Pakistani government, since overtly demonstrating its nuclearized status in 1998 has sought to use nuclear "blackmail" to resolve outstanding issues between it and India. This was most clearly manifested by the invasion of Kargil in the summer of 1999, under the threat of nuclear war. The launching of a war to redress territorial disputes, whilst holding out the threat of nuclear strikes is a clear demonstration of the irrationality of decision making in Pakistan [12]. Pakistan has also been an active proliferator of nuclear weapons technology as well as missile technology. It is widely admitted that Pakistan’s nuclear weapon program is of Chinese parentage and therefore the result of nuclear proliferation. More recently, Pakistan has collaborated with North Korea in developing and testing medium range ballistic missiles [13]. These missiles are widely believed to have been proliferated from China [14]. In addition to being a recipient of nuclear and ballistic missile technology, Pakistan is also believed to be a proliferator of these technologies itself. Senior Saudi Arabian officials have been hosted by the Pakistanis at their nuclear facilities both before and after the war. Iranian officials have underscored the Islamization of Pakistan’s nuclear weapon’s capability on recent visits to Pakistan [17]. The collaboration between Pakistan and other West Asian and declared "rogue states" on missile and nuclear weapons technology is a critical area for concern [15, 16, 17].

In summary, the characteristics of a rogue state include subversion of other states, sponsorship of non-conventional types of violence against other states, irrationality of decision making, willingness to jeopardize international order, state sponsorship of terrorism, and its ability or threat to attack American interests. Pakistan has been documented as providing military, diplomatic and moral support for terrorist movements in various parts of India, Myanmar, Russia (Chechnya and Dagestan), the Central Asian Republics, China (Xinjiang), Egypt, Algeria and Afghanistan. It has been documented as protecting terrorist organizations, providing training and logistical support for terrorist organizations as well as using terrorist organizations as an extension of state policy. Some of these organizations are also believed to possess weapons of mass destruction. Pakistan has openly advocated the use of WMD to resolve border disputes. It has been the recipient of nuclear and missile proliferation, and is believed to be an active proliferator. It has also provided safe harbor to organizations and individuals that have attacked Americans, American embassies, and other American installations. By subverting West, Central and South Asia, as well as parts of North Africa and the Caucasus it is also an extant threat to global peace. Clearly, Pakistan fits the description of a rogue state. More importantly, the government and the military are the prime movers of these irrational policies; consequently, engaging the government is unlikely to eliminate the problem.

The major world powers that are likely to be affected by Pakistan and its rogue acts are likely to be the United States, India, Israel, Russia, and China. However, it has not been branded as a "rogue" by the United States, or any of the other affected powers. These five states must act now, to prevent the problem metastasizing.

References: