Self-Fulfilling Prophecies and Human Rights in Canada's Foreign Policy
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Canadians talk good game on international human rights, but vast gap too often exists between rhetoric and actions. Canadian policy towards Timor, which spent 24 years under brutal Indonesian muitary occupation before finaUy achieving its independence, is case in point. Canadian governments of both major parties faued during those years to live up to their high-minded words on human rights, choosing instead complicity with Indonesian policies.1A former Portuguese colony invaded by in 1975, Timor was little known internationally until the 1990s. Its emergence global issue was perhaps best symbolized by the award of the 1996 Nobel peace prize to Timorese activists Jose Ramos Horta and Bishop Carlos Belo. Yet the Nobel prize provided no to celebrate and no new hope, wrote Marcus Gee of the Globe and Mail, Canada's national newspaper. The winners by all accounts brave and honourable men. But they are linked to cause: the independence of He acknowledged that the Timorese had suffered injustice, that they had as much claim to independent nationhood many existing countries. But that did not negate his claim that independence was impossible for this small place in little-known part of the world, with no allies and an implacable opponent. In his view, the activists' was hopeless: neither their actions nor the award of Nobel prize could change that. Nor could the fall in 1998 of the Indonesian dictator Suharto. There were hopes (realized soon afterwards) that Suharto's successors might take less implacable line on Timor, [b]ut experts say the separatists are fooling themselves if they expect the new government in Jakarta to set the former Portuguese colony free in the near future, Gee wrote. He was similarly unmoved when Indonesia's new president conceded referendum on independence within the year. In the days leading up to the vote, Gee continued to preach the hopelessness of Timorese aspirations. Despite having been victims of quarter century of Indonesian military violence, he advised that they vote for union with Indonesia. Independence would be a leap in the dark. The independent nation of Timor would be flyspeck on the world map. Unable to stand on its own, East Timor would have to throw itself on the mercy of the international community.2 The Timorese voted overwhelmingly in favour of independence on 30 August 1999. They remain independent today.I do not mean to single out one columnist, and in any case others have analyzed media coverage of Timor's independence struggle.3 I have selected this example precisely because Gee is not one of the pro-business Indonesia lobby in the press. He often writes passionately about human rights outside Canada and he described the violence of 1999 deliberate campaign of brutality by the Indonesian army. Gee is simply among the more prolific commentators who assumed that Timor was cause.This lost cause rhetoric was more than just way of writing and talking about Timor. It was also an explanatory factor that affected policy. Indonesian rule over Timor was never inevitable. Knowing this is not matter of mere hindsight. Timorese independence from Portugal was not only plausible in 1975, but was in fact declared that year. Indonesian rule looked well entrenched afterwards, but only result of the active diplomatic, economic, and military support given the Suharto regime by its patrons in the west. Yet that was not how policymakers from Washington to Tokyo to Canberra portrayed it. To them, the of Timorese independence was hopeless and therefore it was foUy to support it. Yet if the was hopeless, it was largely because was so entrenched, thanks to overseas support for its government. The logic was circular, the prophecy self-fulfuling. Once policymakers and press pundits started to argue the lost-cause thesis, they shaped their actions accordingly. …
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 enseignantsNi 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.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,005 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,038 | 0,015 |
| Communication savante | 0,014 | 0,003 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,004 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,006 | 0,007 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,016 | 0,000 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».