Canada's feminist foreign policy amidst Russia's war in Ukraine: An ontological security approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article examines the Justin Trudeau government's embrace of its feminist foreign policy (FFP) in response to Russia's 2022 invasion of Ukraine, using an ontological security (OS) approach. OS approaches anticipate that, in times of uncertainty, states seek to project a coherent identity by narrating policy shifts as consistent with their pre-existing state identity narratives. While many of the Canadian government's policies in response to the invasion of Ukraine aligned with Canada's Feminist International Assistance Policy , official government narratives largely avoided explicit references to feminism or Canada's FFP. This silence reflects an effort to maintain narrative continuity by aligning with NATO's masculinized identity narrative as a collective military power, while downplaying Canada's identity as a state with a feminist foreign policy. By foregrounding the role of identity narratives, this article offers a novel approach to evaluating the Trudeau government's embrace of its FFP, showing how gendered silences help manage ontological insecurity and enable the government to pursue FFP goals even while omitting them from public statements.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.029 | 0.028 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".