Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pakistan has a long history of social movements, some of which have challenged the military’s domination. However, apart from a short period after 1998 nuclear weapon tests by India and Pakistan, there has been limited opposition to nuclear weapons owned by the military. This paper examines one potential factor for this near absence: the intellectual arguments deployed by the main proponents of nuclear disarmament in Pakistan over the last 25 years. The post-1998 anti-nuclear critique in Pakistan has overwhelmingly focused on challenges pertaining safety and security, command and control, geopolitical imperatives of arms races, the operational limits of delivery systems like the short-range ballistic missiles and the risk of a nuclear war. We argue that such arguments inadvertently normalize nuclear weapons. Other arguments based on geopolitics make nuclear weapons appear inevitable in an anarchic world. Highlighting the consequences of a nuclear war has limited purchase in Pakistan where nuclear weapons are seen as the ultimate defense against all large-scale wars, nuclear and conventional. The alternative, we suggest, is to engage a broader critique focussed on the many ways in which nuclear weapons are implicated in everyday social and political life.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".