Pernicious states: Towards a new grammar of international relations

Al Jazeera · collected 2026-09-17 · by Ibrahim Arafat
Read the original at Al Jazeera ↗

Summary

This article discusses how powerful nations use controlling terminology to shape perceptions and justify their actions in international relations. It argues that terms like "rogue state" are often used by Western powers, particularly the United States, to legitimize aggressive policies while obscuring their own harmful behaviors. The author introduces a new concept, “pernicious state,” to highlight states whose structural nature causes sustained harm globally, challenging existing frameworks that disproportionately scrutinize weaker nations.
Written by the local model on 2026-09-17, using this article's own text rather than the other coverage of the same event (that is the story summary below).

Signals How these are calculated →

Claims extracted
68
claim-shaped sentences
Uncertain
4%
3 of 68 hedged
Leaning
Leans strongly left
of the writing, not the subject
Correction & hedging signals
95.7
corrections and hedging in what we collected; not a measure of accuracy
Outlets on this story
1
Politics
Narrative spread
1
articles carrying this framing
Analyzed 2026-09-17 · how these are computed

AI analysis (generated at analysis time, not now)

Story summary

Ibrahim Arafat in Al Jazeera argues for introducing the concept of "pernicious states" to address imbalances in international relations discourse. This new term aims to critique how powerful nations like the United States frame weaker states as existential threats, while ignoring their own harmful policies abroad. The article suggests that dominant powers use terminology and concepts to control global narratives, often justifying aggressive actions under the guise of moral responsibility. For example, it highlights how the US has produced and circulated biased terms within international relations, which smaller or less influential nations cannot match in influence. Arafat's proposal seeks to level this playing field by identifying states whose very structures are designed to cause harm globally, thus challenging the notion that such actions are merely occasional necessities rather than systemic issues.

Written for “International Relations Theory” on 2026-09-17, grounded in this article and the 0 other(s) covering the same event.
Why this leaning score
The article's own words the score was based on. Each is quoted verbatim and was checked against the article text before being stored, so you can find it in the original.
Score -0.75 Confidence high 1 quote(s) discarded as not found in the article
Leaning score -0.75 for article 15584 (high confidence, 5 verified quotes) · logged 2026-09-17

Story

📰 International Relations Theory
Politics · 1 article(s) covering the same event. This is the one the site leads with.

How this is being covered How these are calculated →

Article leaning vs. publisher reliability
Source leaning vs. consistency

Compared with similar articles

This article reads leans strongly left and hedges 4% of its claims. Each row says how that neighbour differs.
The Hindu
⚖️ Leans strongly left 🔴 0% hedged 0 of 21 📰 publisher trust 95
“The articles discuss similar themes but describe different content and are not reporting on a single identical incident.”

Publisher

Al Jazeera · 628 article(s) · 0 correction(s) detected
No corrections detected for this publisher. That may mean careful reporting, or simply that nothing has been checked.

Who wrote this

Ibrahim Arafat
1 article(s) here · 1 carrying a prediction
🔮 By framing weaker states as existential evils that the West has a moral responsibility to curb, these concepts obscure a glaring blind spot: the structural violence of superpowers that may appear orderly at home while wreaking havoc abroad.
The only article under this byline in the corpus.

Topics

American United States Western

Subjects

Western NORP · 2× American NORP · 1× United States GPE · 1×

Narrative

The concept of the pernicious state is intended to address an imbalance in international relations discourse, particularly in how it assesses ideological and erratic foreign policies, including those associated with highly dogmatic and mediocre leadership in recent US history.
framing: assertive · carried by 1 article(s) · first seen 2026-09-17
🔮 By framing weaker states as existential evils that the West has a moral responsibility to curb, these concepts obscure a glaring blind spot: the structural violence of superpowers that may appear orderly at home while wreaking havoc abroad.
2026-09-17 · Al Jazeera
Pernicious states: Towards a new grammar of international relations · assertive framing

Claims (68 extracted, 3 hedged)

Injustice extends not only to people and states, but also to words and concepts. asserted
Injustice → extend → words
Perhaps nowhere is this more evident than in international relations, where power often prevails over wisdom and prudence. asserted
power → prevail → wisdom
Those who control money, trade, technology and resources also seek to control the concepts through which the world is understood. asserted
world → control → which
Naming and framing can define enemies, discredit dissenters, create pretexts for war and aggression, burnish one’s own image and advance political interests. asserted
Naming → define → interests
In short, concepts manufacture the image of reality. asserted
concepts → manufacture → reality
The vast US machinery of concept production has generated an array of loaded and unjust terms that American power has then helped impose on the world. asserted
power → generate → world
In an effort to bring greater justice to this unequal terrain of ideas, this piece proposes a different category: the pernicious state. asserted
piece → bring → category
Every state, of course, can cause harm. asserted
state → cause → harm
But when a state’s historical structure is itself built around causing harm, perniciousness ceases to be an occasional response to necessity and becomes a sustained way of life. asserted
perniciousness → build → life
For that reason, the pernicious state is often gargantuan and imperial, with arms extending across the world. asserted
arms → extend → world
They have always been chaotic, violent, power-driven and bloody. asserted
They → drive → ?
Human history is marked by invasions, mass casualties and devastating conflicts waged by powers thousands of miles from the theatres of destruction. asserted
history → mark → destruction
Yet more insidious than physical violence are the concepts engineered by the powerful to sanitise and legitimise their own conduct while incriminating and smearing the victims of their perniciousness. asserted
concepts → engineer → perniciousness
A Western-centric political and academic lexicon has produced an array of categories used to classify and stigmatise states, while terms such as “rogue state” have become particularly embedded in United States foreign policy discourse. asserted
terms → produce → discourse
Ironically, these Western-minted terms are as theoretically flawed as they are politically aggressive. asserted
they → mint → ?
We now inhabit a “post-fact” world in which truth is subordinated to narrative noise. asserted
truth → inhabit → noise
In this arena, the aim is not to reflect reality but to secure global dominance. asserted
aim → reflect → dominance
This effort is fuelled by right-wing think tanks churning out loaded, pejorative vocabulary weaponised for geopolitical supremacy. asserted
effort → fuel → supremacy
By framing weaker states as existential evils that the West has a moral responsibility to curb, these concepts obscure a glaring blind spot: the structural violence of superpowers that may appear orderly at home while wreaking havoc abroad. uncertain
that → frame → havoc
If existing categories focus scrutiny on weaker states while overlooking the harms caused by the most powerful, then a different analytical concept is needed: the pernicious state. asserted
concept → exist → powerful
The term deserves a place in international relations. asserted
term → deserve → relations
A pernicious state does not merely violate the rules of global order; it rewrites them to institutionalise its own impunity. asserted
it → violate → impunity
Crucially, perniciousness scales with capability. asserted
perniciousness → scale → capability
While mainstream discourse often presents fragile and weaker states as the principal sources of global instability, the capacity to cause harm internationally is inseparable from a state’s overall power. asserted
capacity → present → power
The greater that power, the greater its capacity for perniciousness; superpowers can therefore inflict harm on a scale unavailable to smaller states. asserted
superpowers → inflict → states
Anatomy of pernicious power Pernicious power rarely relies solely on crude or impulsive invasions. asserted
power → rely → invasions
Instead, it operates through a quieter network of economic, cultural, legal and military mechanisms that drain foreign societies while deflecting accountability. asserted
that → operate → accountability
Economically, the pernicious state treats the global market as an engine of extraction. asserted
state → treat → extraction
Through asymmetrical trade agreements and predatory lending practices, it can paralyse developing economies, leaving them structurally dependent and unable to build sovereign domestic industries. asserted
it → paralyse → industries
This process is often enabled by close ties between state power and transnational corporate conglomerates. asserted
process → enable → power
To obscure this economic predation, pernicious power deploys its cultural apparatus. asserted
power → obscure → apparatus
It invents “civilising myths”, casting interventions in the noble language of democracy, development or human rights. asserted
It → invent → democracy
Beneath this facade, local cultures are marginalised and foreign populations portrayed as inherently backward or dangerous. asserted
populations → marginalise → facade
A powerful media apparatus then helps present superpower hegemony as both natural and benevolent. asserted
apparatus → present → hegemony
Legally, the pernicious state is a zealous advocate of a “rules-based international order” – provided that it writes the rules and remains immune from them. asserted
it → base → them
Pernicious superpowers exploit legal loopholes to shield themselves from accountability and cloak systemic injustice in legality. asserted
superpowers → exploit → legality
They may refuse to ratify treaties such as the Rome Statute, block independent global investigations, and outsource destabilisation to corrupt local proxies. uncertain
They → refuse → proxies
When soft power reaches its limits, pernicious states pivot to less visible forms of violence. asserted
states → reach → violence
Rather than bear the political costs of overt military occupation, they may orchestrate covert coups, fund insurgencies, or impose collective punishment. uncertain
they → bear → punishment
Through sweeping unilateral sanctions and embargoes, they can restrict access to medicine and food, pushing civilian populations towards political submission. asserted
they → restrict → submission
…and 28 more, not listed.
💬 Give feedback
🕘 History 🎫 Support