The Role of Khatami's Belief System in Changing Iranian Foreign Policy from 1997 to 2005
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This dissertation maps Khatami's belief system and introduce a number of factors that shaped Iranian foreign policy during his presidency from 1997 to 2005.Khatami's intellectual world reflected on Iran's foreign policy and shifted it from a confrontational to a peaceful approach toward both domestic and international communities.The main question of this dissertation is as follows: "what are the underlying reasons for the change of approach in foreign policy under Khatami's presidency and how has this shift been manifested in Iranian foreign policy?"I will argue that the cornerstone of this fundamental change rests on Khatami's intellectual world, and in order to capture the content of his belief system, I will apply the Operational Code analysis.I have applied Operational Code analysis as the theoretical framework to my research since this approach examines how the decision-maker perceives world politics-whether as conflictual or harmonious-and then decides what strategy he/she would adopt to achieve their goals.As this dissertation shows, Khatami believed that conflict was not a permanent feature of the international system; therefore, he followed a cooperative approach on the foreign policy front.The outcome of this new approach was Dialogue among Civilizations, instead of Clash of Civilizations.Based on this worldview, Iran, under Khatami, experienced the most peaceful relations with the international community since the inception of the Islamic Revolution in 1979.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".