U.S. Foreign Policy Towards Iranian Nuclear Threat from Bill Clinton to Donald Trump Administration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Iranian nuclear threat remains one of the most pressing issue throughout the history of US foreign policy. Ever since the islamic revolution occured in Iran in 1979, Iran hostile activities in Middle East has been a major threat for US security interest, in particular when Iran started to build its ambition to build its nuclear weapon. Having said that, this article aims to discuss US foreign policy toward the threat of Iranian nuclear program from Bill Clinton administration until Trump Administration. By using thematic analysis from Braun and Clarke, this article would scrutinize the internal and external factors of US foreign policy toward Iran and then seeks to understand the change and continuity of US foreign policy from Bill Clinton until Trump administration. From the analysis, it was found that US foreign policy has been influenced a lot by its internal and external factors, resulting in different responses of US foreign policy in each administration. Moreover, US foreign policy has been consistent to put Iranian nuclear threat as its major security threat despite differ in its foreign policy. However, the withdrawal of US under Trump in Joint Comprehensive Plan Of Action (JCPOA) deal has provided an inconsistency of US foreign policy with its previous administration.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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".