NATO Enlargement and the US- Russian Relations in the 21st Century: A Critical Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cold War was the rivalry between the Soviet Union and the United States to expand their ideology and influence worldwide to become the most powerful state of the world. A significant element of the Cold War was the making of alliances by both the United States and the Soviet Union to materialize their objectives and to contain each other’s ballooning influence and ideology. The weakening position of the Soviet Union brought the two countries closer. In addition to this, the United States' assurances to the Soviet Union about restricting NATO’s borders normalized relations between the two rivals after being engaged in a Cold War for over 40 years. Later, the disintegration of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s prompted the world to believe that the Cold War had come to an end. However, the North Atlantic Treaty’s inclusion of more European countries backed by the United States has again reinstated the Russia-US rivalry leading to the Russian invasion of Ukraine. This paper delves into the role of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization during the Cold War era. The paper then tries to figure out whether there is any significant proof of American promises to the Soviet Union regarding the restriction of NATO’s borders. The paper then analyzes Russian policy in the 21st century and its invasions of Ukraine in the context of American promises.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.018 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| 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".