Bibliographic record
Abstract
At the time of this writing, U.S. President Barack Obama was scheduled to attend the Fifth Summit of the Americas in Trinidad and Tobago from 17-19 April 2009. While there, he might do well to underplay what the United States can do for its neighbors. World events have a way of redirecting the best of intentions, as former U.S. President George W. Bush found out just months after he announced his Century of the Americas concept at the April 2001 Third Summit of the Americas in Quebec. First came the September 11 attacks, then the war on terror and lasting preoccupation with the Middle East. Even though the Bush administration managed to conclude trade agreements with eight Latin American countries, boost counternarcotics assistance to Colombia and Mexico, launch Millennium Challenge Corporation grants, and cultivate an extensive network of working relationships throughout the Americas, the perception lingered that U.S. engagement had not only slipped to the back burner, but had somehow fallen off the stove. In light of this sentiment, this article focuses on what a new U.S. agenda in the Western Hemisphere must consider. An ambitious new agenda toward the Western hemisphere may be risky. Compared to billion-dollar-a-month operations in the Middle East and efforts to stem a global recession, anything we do in this corner of the world may now look like small potatoes. (1) Still, ensuring solid, neighborly relations in this region should be on President Obama's list. Shared geography and economic interdependence, plus the need to bolster democratic progress and build cooperation against emerging threats, are good reasons for not letting matters drift. A new agenda should emphasize partnership in areas of mutual interest, encouragement of regional cooperation and leadership, and a suite of fresh solutions for enduring challenges. Why It Matters The United States and its neighbors are already more closely bound than most U.S. citizens probably realize--meaning that what happens in one country can affect another. The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) that links commerce between Canada, the United States, and Mexico does nearly $1 trillion in business annually. Canada is the largest market for U.S. exports, followed by Mexico. (2) Although Latin America claims only 8 percent of total U.S. merchandise (two-way) trade, it is one of our fastest-growing regional partners, surpassing Asia in 2008. (3) And, while our Western hemispheric neighbors supply roughly half of our imported oil, (4) immigrant workers in the United States support local economies back home with their remittances. (5) In terms of travel, it takes less time to fly from Washington, D.C., to Bogota, Colombia, than it does from our nation's capital to Los Angeles, California. And as easily as tourists and cargo cross borders, smugglers move arms, drugs, and people all over the Americas through well-worn routes and trails. Through immigration, legal or otherwise, the U.S. Census Bureau estimates that by next year some 48 million Americans, or 15 percent of the U.S. population, will be Hispanic--probably making it the second- or third-largest Spanish-speaking population in the world. (6) So, in many ways, our lives and futures are intertwined. Keeping Up with the Times The Western hemisphere is not the same as it was thirty years ago, when civil wars raged in Central America and dictators outnumbered civilian elected leaders. Today, all countries in this hemisphere except Cuba enjoy some level of democratic rule, facilitating collaboration on a range of interests. Unlike even fifteen years ago, most states now participate in regional forums, are beginning to cooperate in matters of law enforcement, and contribute to international programs such as peacekeeping. In addition to Canada, countries like El Salvador, Honduras, the Dominican Republic, and Colombia contributed troops to coalition efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan. …
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".