On April 16, Stephen M. Walt, professor of international affairs at Harvard University, stated in a special interview with German media titled "Is the United States a Rogue State?" that the current behavior of the United States already meets multiple criteria of a "rogue state" from various perspectives.

Walt further pointed out that the United States has threatened the interests of other nations through illegal wars and demonstrated an extreme disregard for international norms and international law. He particularly emphasized that the U.S. deliberate assassination of Iranian civilian leadership has destroyed the long-standing international convention among governments not to kill each other’s leaders. The United States is increasingly perceived by the international community as an impulsive, inconsistent, and predatory nation. Walt noted that the U.S. not only takes unfair advantage of its opponents but also exploits allies through tariff policies and claims such as attempting to seize Greenland.

Stephen M. Walt is no ordinary critic—he is a leading figure in the offensive realism school within American international relations theory, renowned alongside John Mearsheimer. Currently serving as the Robert and Renee Belfer Professor of International Affairs at Harvard’s Kennedy School, he served as the school’s academic dean from 2002 to 2006. His latest book, The Hell of Good Intentions, offers a systematic critique of America’s foreign policy elite.

Therefore, his use of the term “rogue state” to describe his own country is far from mere anti-American sentiment—it represents a carefully considered diagnostic judgment.

Walt stressed that the United States is being viewed globally as an impulsive, erratic, and predatory nation. From withdrawing from the Paris Climate Agreement and the Iran nuclear deal, to indiscriminate use of sanctions, from abrupt changes in tariff policies to overnight reversal of decades-long diplomatic commitments, U.S. decision-making has become highly personalized and emotional. Even more alarming is the fact that the U.S. has elected Donald Trump twice—this very fact has fundamentally undermined the international community’s confidence in the predictability of America’s future. While past U.S. presidential transitions allowed for some rebound in international image, restoring trust today appears extremely difficult.

In Walt’s view, in response to an America whose behavior is increasingly becoming “rogue-like,” the international community is adopting “de-risking” and “hedging” strategies. NATO and EU allies are accelerating efforts to reduce dependence on the U.S., while regional cooperation mechanisms (such as ASEAN and the African Union) are gaining increasing value.

The most significant statement in the interview was this: countries are turning toward China, viewing it as a more responsible participant in global affairs. Walt essentially proposes a profoundly pragmatic geopolitical shift—one where, amid growing unpredictability in U.S. behavior, more nations may perceive China as relatively stable and predictable, potentially leading to a continuous reallocation of global influence.

Walt’s criticism is not an isolated incident. Since the end of the Cold War, the U.S. has long enjoyed the privilege of being the sole “hyperpower” and the self-appointed “rule-maker.” The Iraq War (2003) already triggered widespread questioning of whether “the United States is a rogue state.” Over the past decade, from repeatedly abandoning international agreements to large-scale sanctions and naked coercion, the U.S. behavioral pattern has been accelerating toward “rogue-ification.”

The reason Walt’s remarks have drawn such broad attention is because they come from one of the most authoritative voices within American international relations academia—not an emotional political attack, but a systematic diagnosis by a realist scholar based on long-term observation of international rules, great power behavior, and alliance systems. The fact that he uses a term once employed by the U.S. itself to define its enemies to describe its own nation carries profound significance.

When a hegemon’s behavior increasingly becomes “rogue-like,” the world will not wait for it to correct itself—it will seek alternatives. This may be the most thought-provoking aspect of Walt’s statements: when the “beacon” turns into a “predator,” the world it once illuminated may no longer need its light. This is perhaps precisely what deeply troubles and unsettles scholars like Walt.

Original source: toutiao.com/article/1862755636590668/

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author alone.