The problem of a “rules-based international order”: the significance of the non-Western world’s restrained response to the Russia-Ukraine war
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The non-Western world has adopted a nuanced position towards the Ukraine war because it does not see its interest in sanctioning Russia. In part, this reflects Russia’s global economic, military and political importance, but Russia’s justifications for its actions resonate in the non-Western world. This is because the Western world – led by the US – has, since the end of the Cold War, launched wars of aggression, violated international law, and committed many of the sins of which it accuses Russia. Western states are trying to present the Ukraine war as a decisive moment for the “rules-based international order”. Such claims and their obvious hypocrisy undermine Western-and Canadian-credibility. The decision by Canada and its allies to ignore the ways in which Western violence has shaped the post-Cold War world system risks profoundly misinterpreting the actions of states whom they have constructed as opponents and rivals. American unilateralism has created a desire in the larger world for a multipolar world order that can balance American power. The true significance of the Russia-Ukraine war and the non-Western world’s response may be that it indicates the emergence of that multipolar world.
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 | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.043 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".