The Achilles heel of Canadian international citizenship: Indigenous diplomacies and state responses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
At the core of Canada's identity as a diplomatic actor is the image of good international citizenship, but Indigenous issues highlight the gap between this self‐image and flaws in its record. Unlike the situational aspects of targeting specific governments for their human rights records, the Indigenous question is an embedded structural predicament, juxtaposing the mainstream identity of Canada as a country with a colonial past and the identity among the Aboriginal peoples of Canada as territorial occupants. The full extent of this predicament – the “Achilles heel” of Canada's international image – needs to be more fully appreciated in the workings of Canadian foreign policy. Aboriginal representatives, borrowing some of the most Canadian habits of diplomacy, have adopted blame and shame tactics designed to exploit Canadian discomfort. The seriousness with which Canadian diplomats have dealt with these challenges is striking. Using historical and contemporary case studies, this article unpacks and analyses evolving strategies to assert and constrain Indigenous rights and forces on the international stage.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.046 | 0.020 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".