MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403474885 · doi:10.1080/07075332.2024.2416149

Canadian Orientalism: Israel, Palestine, and the Middle East in the ‘Golden Age’ of Canadian Foreign Policy

2024· article· en· W4403474885 on OpenAlexaffabout
Asa McKercher

Bibliographic record

VenueThe International History Review · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsSt. Francis Xavier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOrientalismPalestineMiddle EastAncient historyForeign policyPolitical scienceHistoryLawArchaeologyPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Beyond the issues of Palestine’s partition and the Suez crisis, the Middle East has received little attention within the history of Canadian international relations. And yet, in 1947 and in 1956, Canadian officials undertook fateful actions that shaped this region’s politics. This paper examines Canadian foreign policy toward the Middle East during the 1940s and 1950s, the so-called golden age of Canada’s international influence. In this period, and despite a reputation as honest brokers, Canadian officials came to identify with and support Israel, a country they viewed favourably because they saw it as a fellow Western state that stood out from its Oriental neighbours. Examining how Canadian foreign policy elites viewed Israel, Palestine, the wider Arab world, and the people of these regions during the 1940s and 1950s, this paper traces Orientalism’s important influence on Canada’s relations with the Middle East and stance toward the Arab-Israeli conflict.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.120
Threshold uncertainty score0.872

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.009
Science and technology studies0.0140.013
Scholarly communication0.0100.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.065
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.202 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe International History ReviewSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207