Haiti: A Study in Canadian-American Cooperation in the Western Hemisphere
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The case of Haiti provides insights into Canadian-American cooperating in regional and security issues. Washington and Ottawa shared the same interests, faced similar domestic pressures, and for the most part held a common view over how to pursue restoration of the deposed Aristide government. The only major divergence came when the United States decided to resolve the Haiti crisis by invasion and Canada declined to participate. However, after the American intervention, Canada became a willing participant in the United Nations peacekeeping operation in Haiti and assumed leadership of the UN operation after the United States met its self-imposed one-year deadline for withdrawal of its peacekeepers. The degree of harmony in the two governments' approaches to Haiti is especially remarkable in that it continued for several years and through changes of government in both Washington and Ottawa. This paper will review the crisis in Haiti from the coup in September 1991 through the end of the UN peacekeeping operation in 1997. It will focus on the evolution of American and Canadian policies toward Haiti and attempt to explain how Canada and the United States maintained their cooperation in pursuit of reversing the military coup and restoring of the elected government.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.037 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".