MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1497440745

Silent Conflict: A Hidden History of Early Soviet-Western Relations

2014· article· en· W1497440745 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Oleksa Drachewych

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Slavonic Papers · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHistorical Geopolitical and Social Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIdeologyDiplomacyForeign policyDiplomatic historyNazismForeign relationsPolitical scienceEconomic historyLawSpanish Civil WarInternational relationsPolitical economyPoliticsSociologyHistory
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Michael Jabara Car ley. Silent Conflict: A Hidden History of Early Soviet-Western Relations. Lanliam: Rowman & Littlefield, 2014. xxix, 445 pp. Selected bibliography. Index. $49.00, cloth.In recent years, interwar foreign of the Union has become a topic of greater interest to scholars. Seeking to explain the onset of World War II and, most significantly, the Nazi-Soviet Non-Aggression Pact, the 1930s have been the focus of a number of studies, but the 1920s also have begun to receive some scholarly attention. Alastair KochoWilliams in Russian and Diplomacy, 1900-1939 (Palgrave Macmillan, 2013) shed further light on the diplomatic coips and how the Commissariat of Foreign Affairs was structured. However, since the fall of the Union, there has been a general lack of a comprehensive review of diplomacy during the 1920s. Michael Jabara Carley seeks to fill tins void, and, in general, he does so well.Carley reconsiders the entirety of Bolshevik foreign from the revolution to 1930 and in the process questions long held assumptions or oversimplifications that have plagued the field. Firstly, he dismisses much of the old Cold War position and joins the growing number of scholars who criticize the one-dimensional ideological foreign model that typified it. He also suggests that it is not enough to simply pose the question of whether foreign was ideological or realistic. Carley rejects the need to place it in either one camp or the other, instead focusing on the of diplomats or the leadership. Here, Carley makes one of lus most significant observations, by suggesting that the notion that diplomacy was geared more towards the British or the Germans is incorrect; diplomacy was directed towards achieving interests.Carley's assertion that Soviet interests, whatever they were at a given moment, governed diplomacy, helps to explain to some extent the haphazardness or inconsistency of diplomacy dining the time. For example, the familiar concept of dual policy in foreign affairs is reintroduced, but with a clear indication of how both the People's Commissariat of Foreign Affairs {Narkomindel) and the Comintern represented Soviet interests albeit while serving different masters. Furthermore, the feuding between Comintern officials and diplomats exposes the role domestic politics played. For example, if Grigorii Zinoviev or Nikolai Bukharin angered one diplomat or another, the leadership battles of the late 1920s becomes an important context. If Stalin did not wish to attack a potential supporter, the complaints of Georgii Chicherin or Maksim Litvinov were often noted, but ignored. Tins link between domestic and foreign is presented to help explain how diplomatic relations developed. …

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.983
Threshold uncertainty score0.983

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.224 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Slavonic PapersSame topicHistorical Geopolitical and Social DynamicsFrench-language works237,207