La vulnérabilité stratégique des minéraux : les relations triangulaires entre la République fédérale allemande, l’Afrique du Sud et l’Union soviétique.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Resource diplomacy has emerged as a key element in international relations. The controversy over the use of the grain embargo and persistent concern about the Middle East has allowed food and oil to continue to gain a great deal of attention as weapons of resource diplomacy. Other raw materials, nevertheless, also lend themselves to analysis of this sort. Strategic minerals, in particular, have been increasingly looked at as means of influence in both North/South and the East I West contexts. This study hopes to contribute to this growing body of literature by examining the significance (and merger) of the North/South and East I West contexts in regard to strategic minerals with particular reference to the Federal Republic of Germany. The paper examines the triangular relationship in strategic minerals between the FRG, Southern Africa and the Soviet Union. A number of scenarios have been put forward pertaining to a Soviet threat to Western mineral imports from Southern Africa. The most plausible of these scenarios appears to be that rather than the Soviets initiating action in Africa they respond to events in order to undermine confidence in the West. Such a scenario has serious implications for the FRG. Still, our tentative findings are that dire forecasts about a Soviet stranglehold on the FRG in terms of minerals are overplayed. It is suggested that coping mechanisms do exist for the FRG's supplies of raw materials.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".