Notice bibliographique
Résumé
[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED] In an age of rising powers, there remain few purely regional affairs. With ascendant powers eagerto assert their growing influence overseas, many national issues have become international ones. It seems that the is no exception. While the far north was once the domain of a few select nations, a number of developing nations have now gained influence. Namely, China and India have sought to increase their presence at the same time that Russia is shoring up its own influence there. In May 2013, the members of the Council--the United States, Russia, Canada, Finland, Norway, Iceland, Denmark, and Sweden--voted to install six nations as observer China and India were two of the six states welcomed to the Council (the others were Japan, Singapore, South Korea, and Italy). While they do not have the ability to vote on matters before the Council, China and India now have their feet in the door. The vote marked an important step in recognizing their roles in development. Currently, three of the five BRICS (an acronym for the economies of Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa as emerging powerhouses) have a seat at the affairs table. China and India have joined the Council at a time when their BRICS partner Russia has stirred up aggression in Ukraine, and has also been busy building up its forces. Its actions have raised the specter of military competition in the Arctic, a prospect that the Council was set up to avoid. The concern is whether these three nations will act as responsible partners in regional economic and environmental activities, or if they will opt to enter into competition with other regional powers. There is a clear risk of regional competition and instability. If other states do not act carefully, recent moves by Russia, China, and India may disrupt decades of effective multilateral partnership in the Arctic. The goal for the United States and its allies should be to deter further militarization and resource grabbing, while retaining the BRICS players as effective partners. The states must focus on aligning the interests of Russia, China, and India with their own, in order to preserve the Arctic's diplomatic model. Russia Russia occupies a unique place in discussions over the Arctic. There is no denying that it is a true state, with vast territorial holdings in the far north. However, it has many differences with other traditional Arctic states. The other members of the Council are steadfast allies, linked by various multilateral organizations such as NATO. Russia has been a mercurial, uncertain ally at best. At the same time, it has usually been willing to leave other disputes at the door and commit to peaceful development. However, recent events have changed its strategic calculus. The ongoing crisis in Ukraine has brought Russia's relations with the United States and much of Europe to a low point. Furthermore, now that China and India have become involved in the dialogue, Russia has become increasingly nervous about the potential loss of land and resources. Finally, while the Russian economy's dependence on oil and gas is hardly new, it is a major motivator for Moscow to assert itself in the region: the US Geological Service estimated that the region contains about 10 percent of the Earth's undiscovered oil deposits in addition to up to 30 percent of its untapped natural gas. As a result of these trends, Russia is now seeking to increase its military presence in the Arctic. Russian military officials have announced plans to reposition ground forces along Russia's coast. The military has also started to build new military installations in the region in order to guard its interests along the Northern Sea Route. It has conducted military exercises in the area, and also sought to bolster its nuclear forces there. …
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 distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
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.
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 tête enseignante, 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 ».