Review of “Examining US-China-Russia Foreign Relations: Great Power Politics in a Post-Obama Era”
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Examining US-China-Russia Foreign Relations: Great Power Politics in a Post-Obama Era, G.O. Hall investigates how the three powers coordinate, engage, contain and confront one another in shaping the world order after Obama's presidency.President Obama had proposed a Tripolar Conflict, Cooperation and Competition (TC 3 ) model.Dr Gregory O. Hall further analyzes how the relevance of American double axes (US-China, Axis-1; US-Russia, Axis-2) has evolved in grappling with the global issues and the regional crises.From my point of view, Hall engages in international relations (IR) and diplomatic studies and provides a comprehensive delineation of the contemporary strategic triangle.Each is scrambling for its respective political, economic, military and cultural advantage, dominance and discourse power by handling a series of international and regional incidents.Rather than exploring arcane IR theories such as realism, neorealism, neoclassical realism and constructivism, Hall focuses on the transformative trajectories of US foreign policies towards China and Russia during Trump's and Biden's administrations by drawing on many domestic and international cases.This book is divided into three parts.The first part of the book, composed of three chapters, describes how the relatively smooth and palliative relations within the two US axes of the triangle since the end of the Cold War were progressively worsening.Each was mostly accountable to the individual leaders, their attributes and the domestic variables (p. 3, Chapter 1) when faced with a range of multifarious and complicated situations and environments.USSR was dismantled in late 1991, and Russia declined thereafter.Meanwhile, China gained strength as an ascendant global power in the early 2000s.It gradually assembled a group of states such as Brazil, India, Saudi Arabia and South Africa of the Global South to challenge America's postwar unipolar hegemony as influential regional or emerging global powers in a multilateral arena.This mirrors the current intricate background of US-China-Russia strategic triangle of competition, antagonism and confrontation.According to Hall, China and the Global South are reshaping the contours of the Liberal International Order.The power shift among the great powers generally favors China and the non-Western world overall (p. 4, Chapter 1), which adequately demonstrates the shift of the global balance of power to the global south and east.China's low profile in accomplishing its rapid rise has posed a major threat to US foreign policy and strategic considerations in recent years.Especially with Xi Jinping's coming to power in 2013 and subsequent China's overt wolf warrior diplomacy, a confrontational form of public diplomacy adopted by diplomats of the People's Republic of China in the late
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.004 |
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".