This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
International relations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
[[Iraq#Hashemite monarchy|Iraq]] The anchor (#Hashemite monarchy) is no longer available because it was
deleted by a user before.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors
Expanded
Added to page so it isn't just about the specific example of 20th century client states. --
Masamax 22:18, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)
An utter pile of drivel and bad writing by multiple editors
Special:Diff/1018599511 — Denmark is a "client state" of the United States because an LA Times headline uses the hyperbolic "51st state" to describe some celebrations in a park.
Special:Diff/1030215131 — Romania is a "client state" because an unidentified person once said so on a personal WordPress 'blog.
Special:Diff/1030643997 — France is a "client state" because an expert in social media says so, Norway because of an attention-seeking rant by someone on a book-promotion tour.
Special:Diff/1031254739 — India is a "client state" because of an opinion piece by an Indian politician.
Special:Diff/1037669004 — Southern Sudan is a "client state" because of an article that says no such thing and instead discusses the forces behind it becoming an independent state.
Special:Diff/1040558670 — The United Kingdom is a "client state" because someone suggests that it ought to be, and because a politician hyperbolically says to do stuff in order to avoid becoming a 51st state.
Special:Diff/1045731655 — Australia is a "client state" because of name-calling hyperbole from politicians, rather than any sort of expert, or even inexpert, analysis.
Special:Diff/1045732520 — The United Kingdom is a "client state" because Julian Assange's mother says so.
Special:Diff/1046033922 — Australia is a "client state" because of an opinion piece in The Age.
And there's much more where those came from.
It accounted for almost two-thirds of the total size of the article at one point.
This is complete nonsense, hugely misinforming readers, and crass and thought-free writing based upon conflation, phrase matching instead of reading, opinion as fact, twisting of sources, and outright bad sources.
You want people with good reputations doing proper expert analysis, not people calling names to get attention to their political parties, sons, and book sales.
And stop hiding behind the passive voice with "has been described as".
This article has a lot of problems, so I'll just list them.
68 entries in total have no references.
The source for Nepal is a Huffington Post article from 2010.
WP:RSP says "In the 2020 RfC, there was no consensus on HuffPost staff writers' reliability for political topics. The community considers HuffPost openly biased on US politics. There is no consensus on its reliability for international politics"
The first citation for Djibouti being a Japanese client state is by a website called "Japan Press Weekly", which wiki says is the English-language edition of the
Japanese Communist Party's newspaper . The tone of the articles seems very NPOV. The second citation is from a
Shūkanshi newspaper called
ja:SPA!. Shūkanshi's are "a Japanese term for any weekly magazine, including politically provocative weekly tabloid newspapers." Does not seem like a credible source in that case
The reference for Djibouti being a French client is a Washington Post article from 1993 (This is in the 21st century section).
The sources for Haiti are 1. a dead link and 2. an article talking about an UN peacekeeping mission, no mention of client states.
The source for Cote d'Ivoire is an article from 2004
Azerbaijan's entry needs a better source than the Cato Institute.
WP:RSP says "The Cato Institute is considered generally reliable for its opinion. Some editors consider the Cato Institute an authoritative source on libertarianism in the United States." but that "There is no consensus on whether it is generally reliable on other topics"
The source for Liberia being än US client comes from a 1996 Washington Post article, which says "...marked another low in the country's transformation since 1989 from a reliable U.S. client state into a chaotic battle zone devastated by tribal-based civil war." So the motion it was an US client state was already outdated by 1996, and this is supposed to be about 21st century client states
The reference for South Korea comes from "Liberation News", which is the official newspaper of
Party for Socialism and Liberation. Not a neutral source
The source for Denmark is a Washington Post article from 1989, which doesn't say anything about the country being a client state.
The source for Iceland is an article from 1983
The source for Norway is a 2002 opinion piece from a newspaper owned partly by the Norwegian Red Party
The source for Poland is an opinion piece from a libertarian-conservative magazine
Romania's source is an WordPress blog
Slovakia's sources don't seem to be particularly reliable either. Appear to be opinion pieces
UK's entry are either opinion pieces, or someone expressing their opinion
Fortunately, the entire 21st century client state section has been removed by @
the account 2, and I thank them for that. Maybe a new section about 21st century client states will be made, with actual, proper references this time. If we don't add the section back, we can only assume that by the 21st century, client states no longer exist. Thanks again, for the helpful edits you made, The Account 2.
The contents in this article are full of subjective opinions with no reference
I was shocked to read this topic as it contains no evidence for many of the cases being listed, the current version seems more similar to an opinion forum rather than a serious information platform, and the definition of a “client state” which shown in this page is flawed and equivocal. I expect more action to be done with the development of page, or I will just propose a deletion of the topic if no one is going to make any improvement over the impartiality or verification of the referring sources before this month.
LVTW2 (
talk)
05:09, 19 May 2022 (UTC)reply
USSR and Israel
Agreed, Israel was a client state of the USSR and the academic sources confirm it.
Communist parties worldwide, including in the U.S. and Israel, took their orders from Moscow. Israel's larget political parties from 1947-1977 were socialist/communist.
1st Prime Minister Ben Gurion Famously declared that he is a Bolshevik.
"Agreed"? You posted this comment as a response, but nobody said anything on this talk page about the USSR until you brought it up. Who are you agreeing with? What are you talking about with "multiple agreement from editors"? You agreeing with yourself is not how
consensus works.
As for the sources, what you are posting here would be
original research, except I don't think you actually read your own sources. Per the International Socialist Review article: Nevertheless, Zionist leaders like Ben-Gurion knew that the USSR could not provide the kind of financial and military aid to Israel that the U.S. and American Zionist organizations could. They continued to woo the U.S. to become Israel's chief patron.[1] Per your source, Ben-Gurion described himself as a bolshevik in 1923, decades before the modern state of Israel even existed. It is not enough to dance around decades worth of sources to find those which mention Stalin or communism. Your own sources undermine your point. You need reliable, independent sources which directly describe Israel as a "client state" of the USSR. Do not ignore context. Without good sources, this is a non-starter.
Grayfell (
talk)
20:19, 28 August 2022 (UTC)reply
You are aware that Marxist/socialist parties in the 1940s/50s were directly under the control of USSR?
You do know that Gurion was a leading member of the Marxist
Poale Zion party which then became Mapai?
Israel was ruled under
Mapaisocialistpolitical party. USSR helped establish Israel in 1948 as a socialist client state. Gurion, like Broz Tito tried to pull a Yugoslavia to get more financial aid from both the West and the East, since Israel had huge support from western backers like Bronfman, Lansky....
This is why wikipedia exists, to educate uninformed people who are not aware of the facts that
Mapaisocialistpolitical party in
Israel, and was the dominant force in Israeli politics until its merger into the modern-day
Israeli Labor Party in 1968. During Mapai's time in office, a wide range of progressive reforms were carried out, as characterised by the establishment of a welfare state, providing minimum income, security, and free (or almost free) access to housing subsidies and health and social services.
Walapo (
talk)
21:34, 6 September 2022 (UTC)reply
here is a useful book detailing the alliance between Israel and USSR.