MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W329120402

Satellites and Commissars: Strategy and Conflict in the Politics of Soviet-Bloc Trade

2002· article· en· W329120402 on OpenAlex
David Pollard

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Slavonic Papers · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRussia and Soviet political economy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoliticsBureaucracySubsidyPolitical scienceEconomyEconomic historyPolitical economyInternational tradeEconomicsLaw
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Randall W. Stone. Satellites and Commissars: Strategy and Conflict in the Politics of Soviet-Bloc Trade. Princeton Studies in International History and Politics. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1996. xviii, 283 pp. Tables. Bibliography. Index. $39.50, cloth.This book, which is based on the author's prize-winning doctoral dissertation, examines the trading relationships between the former USSR and its European satellites between the end of World War II and the collapse of the command economies in Eastern and Central Europe. It is a fascinating work, a tale told with verve, and with very thoughtful analysis of what was perhaps considered in the West to be a comparatively straightforward, mutually beneficial trading relationship. What emerges from the author's analysis is anything but a straightforward association between nations with political commonality-it is a mixture of deviousness and strategic deflection of trade requirements by the satellite nations (while at the same time winning the maximum amount of subsidy from the USSR) and the intransigence of the USSR's bureaucratic system and its inability effectively to monitor or enforce trade commitments.As a result, countries within the USSR's sphere of influence can be seen employing various measures to minimize their individual contributions, depending on the nature of domestic industrial activity and their own success in other international markets. Stone argues that, by employing this individual approach, satellite countries missed significant opportunities for collective economic benefit.The author utilizes a wide range of newly-available sources in Moscow, Prague and Warsaw, together with the personal testimony of some of the officials involved in trade negotiations, in order to provide a detailed examination of these negotiations from the inside and, through astute analysis, provides an insight into the political processes surrounding these negotiations. This detailed examination explains how and why those outcomes that seemed less desirable for the satellite countries were altered. It is also shows that, due to problems endemic in the USSR's monitoring systems, these changes or shortfalls often went undetected.There seems little doubt that the USSR did not make effective use of her powerful position in trade negotiations. For various reasons, she did not bring to bear the full scope of her bargaining power and also failed to link economic and security issues and did not integrate several important factors within the trading mechanisms. The satellite countries, on the other hand, were especially good at linking subsidies to trade and achieved success in the former while, at the same time, minimizing the quality and scope of actual deliveries of goods under the trade agreements. …

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.953
Threshold uncertainty score0.873

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.038
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.226 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it