Iranian Civil Rights Movement and Independence Movement in Kosovo? European Union’s Role in the Freedom Movements and State-Building
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Kosovo celebrated its independence in 2008, and many in the Balkans were eager to see finally peace replacing war into the war-torn region. Iranian civil rights movement also shares some interesting features with the Kosovo case. In this paper, we will show how these similarities are being used in Iranian political system. We will investigate the direct correlates between these two cases as well, especially in the case of Diaspora. In the Kosovo case, however, the path to independence has not been as easy and clear as was hoped for in the beginning. Many countries still refuse to recognize Kosovo as an independent state. Among them are even some European Union members. In this study, we explain the reasons behind the lengthy and difficult process of independence. We also investigate role of identity crisis and its direct link to the independence path. In fact, ethnic Albanians were expecting a reunion with their historical homeland in Albania and this mismatch between expectations and reality made it even harder for them to live inside the not yet well-defined new country, Kosovo. On the other hand, language and religious barriers between ethnic Serbs and Albanians in Kosovo keep alive tensions and hostilities in the region. Furthermore, we investigate the way European Union and Kosovo Diaspora play an important role for the future independent country.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".