MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2075277470 · doi:10.1177/004711701015004004

A Middle Power Paradox? South African Diplomacy in the Post-apartheid Era

2001· article· en· W2075277470 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Relations · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGlobal Political and Economic Relations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMiddle powerDiplomacyForeign policyConstructiveMainstreamPower (physics)PraiseMiddle EastContext (archaeology)Political scienceInternational relationsGovernment (linguistics)Subject (documents)Political economySociologyPoliticsLawProcess (computing)Social psychologyPsychologyHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Academic and media discourse on the conduct of South Africa's foreign relations has acquired an almost schizophrenic character in the post-1994 period. On one level, there has been fulsome praise for the country's successful reintegration with the international mainstream. On a second level, however, the new government has been criticized for its inability to articulate a coherent foreign policy agenda, to prioritize its various international relationships, and for its general failure to bring a sense of order, purpose and direction to a chaotic foreign policy environment. This article, whilst recognizing many of the deficiencies in both foreign policy formulation and implementation in the post-apartheid period, seeks to argue that the new South Africa is - albeit rather haphazardly - in the process of creating a distinctive and constructive niche for itself in global affairs. This is the attempt to join the ranks of the so-called middle powers - states seeking to be 'good international citizens' primarily through mediating initiatives and brokering deals - thereby securing many of the benefits which have traditionally flowed to states with the capacity to assume such an international posture. The article will attempt to locate the study of South Africa's middle power attributes, and its expectations of and attitudes towards middle power status, within the context of the wider theoretical literature on the subject. It will then progress, via the use of three case studies at both the global and regional level, to discuss South African attempts to execute this particular diplomatic option. The article concludes with a discussion of the problems South Africa is likely to encounter as it develops this option. Here attention will be given to the paradox of South Africa's middle power status. This is that the country has been more successful in its attempt to position itself as a good international citizen on issues with a genuinely global resonance as opposed to those issues addressed within the regional and sub-regional contexts where Pretoria might have been expected to excel. This paradox has potentially serious implications for South Africa's ability to emulate the Canadian and Australian experiences and to stay the course as a truly credible and effective middle power into the 21st century.

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.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.725
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.271 · 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