The table below lists pariah states by number of countries – pariah state nationals were able to enter freely (i.e. visa-free) in 2012 – according to Henley`s Visa Restrictions Index 2012 (while the figures in parentheses indicate the pariah state`s HDI in 2012 – as published by UNDP in March 2013). For comparison, the numbers of parallel regular states are also given. The second characteristic is that, although they are not necessarily small, pariah states cannot be “considered a great power in the world”. Certainly, there are people who disagree with this second characteristic, such as Noam Chomsky (quoted above) and author-journalist Robert Parry,[15] who have each applied their own personal criteria to describe the United States as a pariah state. This map shows the countries that are currently called pariah states or that were previously called pariah states by the international community. Such a case occurred between the Ottoman Empire and European states. In the Peace of Westphalia of 1648, European states considered the Ottoman Empire a “pariah” state because of their religion. This treaty has served as the cornerstone of international law. Downing Street has made clear its desire to make Russia a pariah, with the prime minister`s spokesman saying on Monday that the sanctions were aimed at “toppling Putin`s regime”.

Iraq has also been considered a pariah state on several occasions. This distinction is mainly due to the fact that it is a relatively young country that operated under Saddam Hussein without clearly defined and agreed borders. For many international relations experts, a clear indicator of a pariah state is one that lacks a strong national identity, such as borders. Political commentator and activist Noam Chomsky declared in 2003 and again in 2014 that the United States had become a pariah state. It is often used in the term social pariah and in the context of politics. Russia warned EBE that its actions would turn it into a “pariah state” – a country seen as a pariah of the community of nations. Pariah states may be excluded from international institutions and it may be difficult to do the things nations need to do for their economies and societies to thrive – for example, they may not be able to trade with other countries or their residents may not be able to travel abroad due to sanctions. The first mentions of pariah in English date back to the early 1600s. It comes from paṟaiyan, a word that means “drum” in Tamil (one of the many Indian languages spoken throughout the country). The Paraiyans were members of a group considered very low in the Indian caste system. They served as ceremonial drummers and later as workers.

Finally, pariah was more commonly used in English to refer to members of a caste who were described as untouchables. In the 1800s, he referred to anyone rejected by society – a “pariah.” Other nations often considered pariah states are those that violate the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Iran is an example. In fact, the United States, Britain and France have called Iran a pariah state because of its nuclear acquisition program. As of August 2014, there were no internationally recognized criteria for designating a nation as a pariah state, nor was there a single authority accepted for them. Some criteria are suggested in the definitions in the previous section. For example, Harkavy and Marks refer in their definitions to the international behavior of a nation to qualify it for the role of pariah. [8] Marks goes further and includes the question of nuclear weapons in his criteria,[10] while Weiss adds “the provocative existence of a state in the face of international non-recognition”. [1] Bellany`s only criterion, however, is a lack of soft power,[6] while the Penguin Dictionary of International Relations requires that pariah states “also suffer from diplomatic isolation and widespread global moral shame.” [7] A pariah state is a nation whose behavior is considered incompatible with international standards of conduct, either by the rest of the international community (such as the United Nations) or by some of its most powerful states. A pariah state may face international isolation, sanctions, or even invasion by nations that deem its policies or actions unacceptable.

The term is closely related to the term “rogue state”. After all, pariah states tend to develop resentment against the established world order. They could try to undermine the international status quo. These characteristics are presented as generalizations and are not intended by the author to apply to all pariah states. [9] A roar came from the people; a trumpeted elephant; Outcast dogs bark. According to Lawal, international law can serve as an objective criterion. For example, countries that violate the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons are often punished for their actions. These sanctions may include the designation of a pariah state, as was the approach of the United States. [3] [Note 2] However, international law may fail in this regard, because in the current international system, most nation-states recognize their own legal supremacy over the laws of an international governing body. Therefore, according to Lawal, consensus under international law can be problematic. In the case of the development of nuclear weapons, international isolation can have a paradoxical “push effect” on a pariah state and motivate the accelerated development of nuclear weapons. [3] In 2012, there was no provision in international law for pariah status.

[3] Noam Chomsky – an influential left-wing philosopher and linguist – has repeatedly argued that the US should be seen as a pariah state, each time triggered by the US`s violation of international law. The first is that pariah states tend to have a strong identity as a nation. Geldenhuys cites Iraq as an example. Iraq is a relatively young nation-state with “artificial borders.” Saddam Hussein`s ruling Baath Party denied that Iraqis had formed a nation. On the contrary, they claimed that the Iraqis were part of a larger Arab nation. [9] (Iraqi Kurds are not Arabs.[ 14]) Example: Although the accused was found not guilty, he was still treated as an outcast in his hometown, and former close friends now refused to talk to him. He was an outcast, a leper, and so he must continue – a cause that should be avoided.