The Ugly? Rogue States as Norm Entrepreneurs

  • Carmen WunderlichEmail author
Part of the Norm Research in International Relations book series (NOREINRE)


This chapter takes a counter-intuitive approach by arguing that “rogue states”—perceived norm breakers—can also function as norm makers. Wunderlich links her argument to recent critical norm studies that have begun to inquire norm-promoting efforts by unconventional types of actors, such as non-Western and “illiberal” norm advocates or norm antipreneurs. She also ties into research on norm contestation and resistance toward international norms in order to come up with alternative explanations for the relationship of alleged “rogue states” and norms.


  1. Acharya, A. (2004). How ideas spread: Whose norms matter? Norm localization and institutional change in Asian regionalism. International Organization, 58(2), 239–275.Google Scholar
  2. Acharya, A. (2009). Whose ideas matter? Agency and power in Asian regionalism. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Library.Google Scholar
  3. Acharya, A. (2011). Norm subsidiarity and regional orders. Sovereignty, regionalism, and rule-making in the Third World. International Studies Quarterly, 55(1), 95–123.Google Scholar
  4. Adamson, F. (2005). Global liberalism versus political Islam: Competing ideological frameworks in international politics. International Studies Review, 7(4), 547–569.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Alden, C., & Large, D. (2015). On becoming a norms maker: Chinese foreign policy, norms evolution and the challenges of security in Africa. The China Quarterly, 221, 123–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bettiza, G., & Dionigi, F. (2014). Beyond constructivism’s liberal bias: Islamic norm entrepreneurs in a post-secular world society. EUI Working Paper MWP 2014/10. Accessed 28 April 2017.
  7. Bloomfield, A. (2016). Norm antipreneurs and theorizing resistance to normative change. Review of International Studies, 42(2), 310–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bob, C. (2012). The global right wing and the clash of world politics. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Carpenter, C. (2014). “Norm antipreneurship” and Russia’s [Reported] Use of autonomous weapons. Resource Document. Duck of Minerva. Accessed 28 April 2017.
  10. Dunne, Tim. (2007). “The rules of the game are changing”: Fundamental human rights in crisis after 9/11. International Politics, 44(2–3), 269–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Ehrenreich Brooks, R. (2003). The new imperialism: Violence, norms, and the “rule of law”. Michigan Law Review, 101(7), 2275–2340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Epstein, C. (2012). Symposium: Interrogating the use of norms in international relations. An introduction. International Studies Perspectives, 13(2), 121–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Flockhart, T. (2004). “Masters and novices”: Socialization and social learning through the NATO parliamentary assembly. International Relations, 18(3), 361–380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Glozman, E., Barak-Corren, N., & Yaniv, I. (2014). False negotiations: The art and science of not reaching an agreement. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 59(4), 671–697.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Großklaus, M. (2015). Appropriation and the dualism of human rights: Understanding the contradictory impact of gender norms in Nigeria. Third World Quarterly, 36(6), 1253–1267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hasenclever, A., & Narr, H. (2019). The dark side of the affectedness-paradigm: Lessons from the indigenous peoples’ movement at the United Nations. Third World Thematics: A TWQ Journal. Scholar
  17. Heller, R., & Kahl, M. (2013). Tracing and understanding ‘bad‘ norm dynamics in counterterrorism. The current debates in IR research. Critical Studies on Terrorism, 6(3), 414–428.Google Scholar
  18. Heller, R., Kahl, M., & Pisoiu, D. (2012). The “dark” side of normative argumentation—The case of counterterrorism policy. Global Constitutionalism, 1(2), 278–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hirata, K. (2004). Beached whales. Examining Japan’s rejection of an international norm. Social Science Japan Journal, 7(2), 177–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hofius, M., Wilkens, J., Hansen-Magnusson, H., & Gholiagha, S. (2014). Den Schleier lichten? Kritische Normenforschung, Freiheit und Gleichberechtigung im Kontext des «Arabischen Frühlings». Eine Replik auf Engelkamp/Glaab/Renner, Ulbert und Deitelhoff/Zimmermann. Zeitschrift für Internationale Beziehungen, 2, 85–105.Google Scholar
  21. Inayatullah, N., & Blaney, D. (2012). The dark heart of kindness: The social construction of deflection. International Studies Perspectives, 13(2), 164–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Jabri, V. (2014). Disarming norms: Postcolonial agency and the constitution of the international. International Theory, 6(2), 372–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Jetschke, A., & Liese, A. (2013). The power of human rights a decade after: From Euphoria to contestation. In T. Risse, S. Ropp, & K. Sikkink (Eds.), The persistent power of human rights: From commitment to compliance (pp. 26–42). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Jose, B., & Stefes, C. H. (2018). Russian norm entrepreneurship in Crimea: Serious contestation or cheap talk?. Hamburg: German Institute of Global and Area Studies.Google Scholar
  25. Junk, J. (2014). Internal dynamics and dysfunctions of international organizations: An introduction to the special issue. Journal of International Organization Studies, 5(1), 8–11.Google Scholar
  26. Lantis, J. (2011). Redefining the nonproliferation norm? Australian Uranium, the NPT, and the global nuclear revival. Australian Journal of Politics and History, 57(4), 543–561.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Liese, A. (2009). Exceptional necessity—How liberal democracies contest the prohibition of torture and Ill-Treatment when countering terrorism. Journal of International Law and International Relations, 5(1), 17–47.Google Scholar
  28. Lynch, M. (2006). Al-Qaeda’s constructivist turn. Resource Document. Praeger Security International. Accessed 28 April 2017.
  29. McKeown, R. (2009). Norm regress: US revisionism and the slow death of the torture norm. International Relations, 23(1), 5–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Müller, H. (2011). Habermas meets role theory. Communicative action as role playing? In S. Harnisch, C. Frank, & H. Maull (Eds.), Role theory in international relations. Approaches and analyses (pp. 55–73). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  31. Panke, D., & Petersohn, U. (2012). Why international norms disappear sometimes. European Journal of International Relations, 18(4), 719–742.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Posner, R. (1997). Social norms and the law: An economic approach. The American Economic Review, 87(2), 365–369.Google Scholar
  33. Posner, R. (1998). The problematics of moral and legal theory. Harvard Law Review, 111(7), 1637–1717.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Prantl, J., & Nakano, R. (2011). Global norm diffusion in East Asia: How China and Japan implement the responsibility to protect. International Relations, 25(2), 204–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Risse, T. (2002). Transnational actors and world politics. In W. Carlsnaes, T. Risse, & B. Simmons (Eds.), Handbook of international relations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  36. Risse, T., & Sikkink, K. (1999). The socialization of international human rights norms into domestic practices: Introduction. In T. Risse, S. Ropp, & K. Sikkink (Eds.), The power of human rights, international norms and domestic change (pp. 1–38). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Rosert, E., & Schirmbeck, S. (2007). Zur Erosion internationaler Normen. Folterverbot und nukleares Tabu in der Diskussion. Zeitschrift für Internationale Beziehungen, 14(2), 253–288.Google Scholar
  38. Steinhilper, E. (2015). From “the rest” to “the west”? rights of indigenous peoples and the western bias in norm diffusion research. International Studies Review, 17(4), 536–555.Google Scholar
  39. Towns, A. (2012). Norms and social hierarchies: Understanding international policy diffusion “from below”. International Organization, 66(2), 179–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Widmaier, W., & Park, S. (2012). Differences beyond theory. Structural, strategic, and sentimental approaches to normative change. International Studies Perspectives, 13(2), 123–134.Google Scholar
  41. Wiener, A. (2018). Agency of the governed in global international relations: Access to norm validation. Third World Thematics: A TWQ Journal, 2(5), 709–725.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Zimmermann, L. (2017). Global norms with a local face? Rule-of-law promotion and norm translation. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Zwingel, S. (2012). How do norms travel? Theorizing international women’s rights in transnational perspective. International Studies Quarterly, 56(1), 115–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of Political ScienceUniversity of Duisburg-EssenDuisburgGermany

Personalised recommendations