John Judis makes a rather brave allegation that American support of the recent Ethiopian intervention into Somalia has made us a "rogue state." Matthew Yglesias echoes this contention. There's one complicating detail Judis leaves out, which, ultimately, renders the crux of his argument moot. Somalia has a legitimate, internationally recognized government. Yet, for over a decade, it has been powerless and was not even based in Mogadishu, the country's capital city, but in a place called Baidoa. Ever since America's 1993 intervention, we seem to have forgotten about it. Then, with the Islamist takeover of the country in July, the government explicitly called for foreign intervention, namely from Ethiopia. So, contra Judis, we did not violate Somalian sovereignty. The Islamists running the country had no claims to sovereignty for us to violate. And Judis lends credence to an Islamist government when it deserves none. Without offering evidence, he writes, "The new government had brought a harsh Islamic justice and order to Somalia, which, for all its own injustice, was preferable to the chaos that had prevailed." And Mussolini made the trains run on time. Here's a hypothetical that while not completely analogous, is instructive. Let's say tomorrow, right-wing extremists take over Canada. The Canadian parliament is forced to regroup in Saskatchewan. Deposed Prime Minister Stephen Harper - no longer in power, but recognized by the United States - asks us to intervene and kick out the government in Ontario. We would be justified, legally, in doing so. We can and should debate the merits of the Ethiopian intervention, and while I am inclined to support it, Judis does make a strong case that it hurts our image internationally. But our heeding the call of an internationally recognized - albeit weak - government to come to its aid does not make us a "rogue state," on par with Libya, North Korea, or Iran. --James Kirchick