The Role of Bahrain Kingdom in the Framework of the Cooperation Council for the Arab States of the Gulf (From 2000 to 2006)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The current study seeks to identify the role of Bahrain Kingdom in the framework of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) during the period from 2000 to 2006. The importance of the study stems from a set of considerations, the most important of which are: identifying the nature of roles that the member states in a specific regional organization undertake, studying the concept of regionalism and the regional system, and identifying the nature of the role of the member states in the scope of the regional organization in terms of conflict and integration. The problem of the study is that Bahrain is a small state and its resources are limited. It occupies an important strategic location in a very significant strategic region in the context of the international interactions. Its direct geographical neighbor is characterized by great resources. In addition, its surrounded regional environment is characterized by tension and instability. Thus, the question in such circumstances is: how Bahrain Kingdom can create and practice its role in the framework the GCC, which is the regional organization activated by interactions between geographically reproached member states? To achieve the required results, the study adopted the international system approach and the historical approach. The study has concluded a set of findings. The most significant findings are: 1- the GCC came as a result of a set of internal, regional and international factors, and not one factor. 2- The GCC has been able to achieve the internal and external cooperation between its member states. 3- The regional and international developments have a tangible effect on Bahrain and its relation with the GCC. 4- Bahrain plays a prominent role in activating the march of cooperation and integration between the members of the Council in various economic, political, social, cultural and media fields.
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 | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".