MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414033311 · doi:10.1177/17506352251365424

Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait and the mediated politics of nation-state building: An applied thematic analysis of <i>al-Nida’</i> newspaper

2025· article· en· W4414033311 on OpenAlexaff
Ahmed Al‐Rawi, Hayder Alkilabi

Bibliographic record

VenueMedia War & Conflict · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMiddle East and Rwanda Conflicts
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversitySimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNewspaperPoliticsState (computer science)Media studiesPolitical scienceThematic analysisThematic mapSociologyLawSocial scienceGeographyQualitative researchCartographyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

After the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, al-Nida’ (The Call) newspaper was established as a propaganda tool to justify annexation and communicate with Kuwaiti citizens. This study conducts an archival analysis of 104 issues to examine how the Ba’athist regime framed its nation-state building efforts through media. This research applies Mylonas’s theoretical framework ( The Politics of Nation-Building: Making Co-Nationals, Refugees, and Minorities , 2012) on assimilation, accommodation, and exclusion to examine how Ba’athist propaganda in al-Nida’ constructed and omitted nation-building strategies. Using Applied Thematic Analysis (ATA), six dominant themes emerged: historical claims, exclusion of the Kuwaiti ruling elite, sociopolitical integration, law and order, economic integration, and territorial claims. This study highlights the role of propaganda in wartime nation-state building, demonstrating how authoritarian regimes engineer national identity through media. By analyzing al-Nida’ , this research contributes to scholarship on nation-state legitimacy, wartime propaganda, and occupation narratives, offering insights into how war, propaganda, and state-building efforts intersect in nation-building projects.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.006
Science and technology studies0.0080.011
Scholarly communication0.0070.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedia War & ConflictSame topicMiddle East and Rwanda ConflictsFrench-language works237,207