Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article analyses Japanese approach towards peacekeeping and issues associated with Japans participation in the peacekeeping operations (PKOs). It focuses on factors which influence shaping and transformation of Japans approach towards this sphere of UN activity. For the first time, Japan sent its Self-defense forces to participate in the PKO in the early 1990s and since then peacemaking has become one of the symbols of Japan's contribution to international security. Despite the significance of cooperation with the UN that the Japanese government has underlined, the indicators that characterize Japan's participation in peacekeeping remain at a low level. In the article, the author explores the causes of this phenomenon and identifies patterns that characterize the models of Japanese participation in PKO. Using the historical method and content analysis of official documents and speeches by Japans representatives the author explores the hypothesis that currently, from the point of view of the Japanese government, the issue of participation in the PKOs is important as a way to adapt the public to the expansion of the sphere of activity of the Self-defense forces, but in practice, the ruling circles seek to avoid the risks associated with the participation of the Japanese military in the PKOs, preferring to shift the focus on peace-building, financial, educational and technological contribution that Japan can make to UN operations. The concept of active pacifism promoted by Abe did not lead to a more extensive participation of the Japanese military in the PKOs. An analysis of current trends in peacekeeping suggests that the participation of Self-defense forces in PKOs will remain at a low level and will be offset by other opportunities for Japan to contribute to international peacekeeping.
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 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 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".