From SIHRN to Post-War North and East: The Limits of the ‘Peace through Development’ Paradigm in Sri Lanka
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Charan Rainford and Ambika Satkunanathan We have removed the word minorities from our vocabulary three years ago. No longer are the Tamils, Muslims, Burghers, Malays and any others minorities. There are only two peoples in this country. One is the people that love this country. The other comprises the small groups that have no love for the land of their birth. Those who do not love the country are now a lesser group. (President Mahinda Rajapakse, national address on defeating the LTTE, May 19 th 2009) With the apparent military defeat of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) in May of 2009, the Sri Lankan government was presented with an opportunity to craft a political settlement that would go some way to meet the decades' long grievances of the Sri Lankan Tamil community. But as is evidenced by the speech quoted above, President Mahinda Rajapakse outlined a post-war (as opposed to post-conflict) Sri Lanka ‘without minorities,’ that effectively eschewed ethnicity in favour of a single identity. While effectively denying the need for a political solution, President Rajapakse and members of the regime have equated peace, and stability, with economic development, which they claim will address the concerns and grievances of minorities. The peace through development paradigm presupposes that economic development is the primary approach to generating peace, by alleviating minority grievances without any explicit state reform. This approach has fundamentally underestimated the overwhelmingly political nature of both peace and development.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".