Evolution Of Conflict Studies In The International Security Context In Post-Soviet Russia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Article analyses formation and development of the conflict studies in Russia as a sub-discipline within political sciences, on the edge between political theory and studies of international relations and international security. Article defines stages of formation of conflict studies in Russia, analyzes social request for studies of conflicts, considers influence of foreign and international institutes and research, both form the CIS and from other foreign countries, onto the conflict studies in Russia. Author postulates turning of the "New Political Thinking"paradigm elaborated by Gorbachev that allowed reconsidering Moscow's attitude towards various conflicts and rethinking of theoretical principles of conflict analysis, that are not anymore limited to class struggle and ideological contradictions. Introduction of more pluralistic concepts of "socio-political model" and "world order" instead of Marxist category of "socio-economic formation" led to remodeling of international relations along new lines, as well as study contradictions within one social system. Splash of inter-ethnic and separatist conflicts in the first half of the 1990s led to shaping of "practically oriented conflict studies" reflecting political interests of conflict sides in conflicts in Karabakh, Georgia/Abkhazia, Georgia/South Ossetia, Moldova/Transnistria. On the eve of 1990s-2000s formation of theoretical systemic conflict studies as a discipline took place, and this discipline was already quite strongly interfaced with international and foreign conflict studies theory. Article considers role of various institutes of the Russian Academy of Science, research centers including Russian Council on International Affairs, Council on Foreign and Defense Policy? Russian Pugwash Committee, Center for Political and International studies, Moscow Carnegie Center, Russian institute for Strategic Studies, Institute for the USA and Canada Studies, etc. As a separate direction of studies article tackles studies of post-soviet conflicts by foreign institutes and centers, like UNIDIR (Geneva), SIPRI (Stockholm), EU ISS (Paris), British Royal institute of International Affairs. Interaction of Russian and Swiss scientists on the basis of Geneva-based GCSP and DCAF attracts special attention. In conclusion typical issues in focus, as well as theme fields of the Russian conflict studies as a sub-discipline within political sciences are formulated.
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 | 0.003 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".