Smoke and Mirrors: Globalized Terrorism and the Illusion of Multilateral Security
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Smoke and Mirrors: Globalized Terrorism and the Illusion of Multilateral Security, Frank P. Harvey, Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2004, p. x, 345. Following the second Gulf War, international observers were quick to criticize the unilateral behaviour of the United States. Without a UN mandate, the allies had undermined the very institution they had created to foster multilateralism following the Second World War. Yet, Frank Harvey makes the case that not only is unilateralism the new trend in American foreign policy, it is desirable in an age of terrorism and nuclear proliferation. Harvey begins by scrutinizing the foundations of multilateralism and their applicability to the post 9/11 world. He concludes that not only is the higher moral ground associated with multilateralism a fallacy, but that multilateralism can be dangerous in an era where rapid responses to security threats are needed. To justify his conclusions, Harvey examines both the buildup to the 2003 Iraq conflict and the issue of Ballistic Missile Defense. He concludes with an analysis of future U.S. and Canadian security policy.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".