MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2199147501 · doi:10.1177/002070200806300309

Afghanistan and the Revolution in Canadian Foreign Policy

2008· article· en· W2199147501 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Alexander Moens

Notice bibliographique

RevueInternational Journal Canada s Journal of Global Policy Analysis · 2008
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiquePolitics and Conflicts in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Middle East
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésHuman rightsDiplomacyTreatyPeacekeepingPolitical scienceForeign policyInternational securityNational securityNorth Atlantic TreatyNegotiationHuman securityPopulationPoliticsLawInternational tradePolitical economyPublic administrationSociologyEconomics

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

After the end of the Cold War, Canada continued to participate in UN peacekeeping missions and NATO operations, but there was no overall strategic sense about priorities. While defence dollars shrank by more than 20 percent in the 1990s, the 1994 white paper on defence made few hard choices or trade-offs. Even so, there was no follow-up in terms of new equipment to match strategy.The drift was halted with the arrival of Lloyd Axworthy as the new foreign minister in 1996. Canada began to develop a new foreign policy based on a soft power variant called human security that emphasizes networking and coalition- building among civil society groups. Human security replaces the concept of national interest with the perspective of assisting individuals and groups at conflict inside failing states. While the idea of human security came from the world of social and economic development, Axworthy took it into the international security realm. Canada played a pivotal role in rallying the global network of nongovernmental organizations and willing governments to sign a new treaty on banning the production, sale, and use of antipersonnel landmines. Canada also played a key role in the negotiations that led to the International Criminal Court in 1998. Talks on banning small arms exports and protecting war- affected children were also initiated.Human security influenced Canadian defence policy - as it did in likeminded allies such as the Netherlands - by developing the 3D approach in which diplomacy, development, and defence form a single team to help the population in failed states such as in Bosnia, Haiti, and Afghanistan. Canadian forces, in turn, borrowed the so-called three- block operational approach developed by the US Marine Corps whereby soldiers are trained to move quickly from peace enforcement to stabilization to humanitarian assistance and civil reconstruction operations.The attacks of 9/11 generated the biggest change in American security policy since the onset of containment in the early 1950s. By denning the new priority as an international war on terror, the US pushed hard against the working consensus among western countries that failed states could best be fixed with a mixture of human security and development policies. The Axworthy agenda gradually moved to the background in Canada's foreign policy with Axworthy's retirement from politics.Canada's commitment to UN peacekeeping missions also began to dry up. Only 60 Canadian personnel were deployed in UN missions in 2006. In its place has come a robust commitment to creating security conditions in Afghanistan. The switch away from human security to more traditional military operations began in the last year of the Liberal government led by Paul Martin. In 2004, for the first time ever, Canada issued a national rather than an international security policy. It put the protection of Canadians and Canadian territory as an unambiguous priority. The international policy statement issued in 2005, still mentions the responsibility to protect, but the defence section emphasizes stronger Canadian defence, more cooperation with the United States, and renewal of expeditionary capabilities.1 The policy does not abandon the approach of a three-block military, but calls for a variety of hard military assets, including special forces.As Canadian foreign policy moved away from human security and light peacekeeping, it turned its focus to the North Atlantic alliance, which had been relegated to third-level importance (behind the United Nations, and even cooperation with the European Union) in Canadian foreign policy and diplomacy in the 1990s, even though many Canadian soldiers served in NATO operations in the Balkans. Canada became a proponent of the various schemes to revitalize NATO, including the allied transformation command in Norfolk and the NATO response force. A Canadian- E U agreement for Canada to participate in E U -led missions lost most of its lustre for Ottawa as it began to reinvest in NATO operations in Afghanistan. …

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,005
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,349
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,755

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0050,008
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,001
Bibliométrie0,0040,007
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0400,013
Communication savante0,0170,004
Science ouverte0,0020,005
Intégrité de la recherche0,0060,006
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0240,001

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,011
Tête enseignante GPT0,302
Écart entre enseignants0,291 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations16
Publié2008
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueInternational Journal Canada s Journal of Global Policy AnalysisMême sujetPolitics and Conflicts in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Middle EastTravaux en français237 207