Statelessness and Solidarity: Palestinians, Dhofaris, and Saharawis in Tricontinental Media
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract From its beginning, the Organisation of Solidarity of the Peoples of Africa, Asia, and Latin America ( ospaaal ) used its print media to campaign on behalf of Palestinian nationalism, articulating the concerns of displaced Palestinians from a perspective of unrecognised and thwarted national liberation movements. This organisation, responsible for carrying out the activities of the Tricontinental group that began meeting in Havana in 1966, identified the issue of Palestinian statelessness as a key feature of ongoing colonialism. From this perspective, ospaaal developed a platform from which to articulate solidarity against ongoing imperialism, one which could be usefully extended to explain and render solidarity with other causes. We argue that ospaaal ’s visual and narrative framework, extended to the anti-colonial advocacy first for Dhofar (from the late 1960s to middle of the 1970s) and later for Western Sahara (late 1970s to 1990), presented a powerful, though limited, critique of international governance institutions from the Global South. Tricontinental publications’ reporting and solidarity media, in framing statelessness as an inherent problem of an incomplete process of decolonisation, critiqued the rhetorical strategies employed by imperial powers to maintain colonial relationships through international organisations like the United Nations.
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 | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.020 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".