The Present and Future of Kuwaiti-Iranian Relations and Their Influence on the Security of the Arabian Gulf
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: The objective is to study the present and future of Kuwaiti-Iranian relations through the determinants of the geographical, social, economic and political relationship and the reflection of that relation on the security of the Gulf. The study also examines the future of Gulf security in light of the Kuwaiti-Iranian relations.Method: The study used the approach of the national interest because it is linked to the theory of power, according to Hans Morgenthau, since power is the goal of the foreign policy maker, a major objective of the state in its external relations. Where the political interactions of Kuwait with the Gulf States and Iran is considered in accordance with its national interest.Results: The study concluded that the Kuwaiti-Iranian relations were positive at most stages and that security is one of the most important problems for small countries, but it is capable of playing a role in regional security. The future of Gulf security is linked to the relations of Gulf countries and Iran with major countries and for Kuwait specifically in its relationship with the United States of America and Western Countries through the security and military agreements.Conclusion: The study shows that the State of Kuwait as a small country played a major role through its political and geographical determinants in resolving regional disputes and conflicts.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".