Between Promise and Practice: Problematizing the Contradictory Role of Peacekeeping in Canadian Strategic Culture, 1991-2017
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Peacekeeping has become one of the most enduring traditions, symbols, and narratives that constitutes Canadian national identity and strategic culture since Lester B. Pearson won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1957 for creating the first peacekeeping force. However, upon closer inspection of Canada’s record on peacekeeping, contradictions emerge between the promise and practice of this national tradition. Why does peacekeeping persist as a tenet of Canadian identity and strategic culture when it no longer plays a prominent international role in peacekeeping? While perplexing, the theories of strategic cultural change and competing strategic subcultures provide the framework for addressing this question. This thesis finds that contradictions persist in the promise and practice of peacekeeping because while the Pearsonian Internationalist subculture that grew out of Canada’s peacekeeping achievements is no longer a dominant worldview, it endures as a potent vestigial influence that continues to strike at the heart of what it means to be Canadian and helps contextualize the efficaciousness of the new Robust Western Ally hegemonic subculture’s policy preferences. Through employing a Foucauldian Discourse Analysis to reveal the mechanisms of power employed by the competing subcultures in academic, media, and political discourses, this thesis sheds light on how norms, narratives, and cultural factors that have clandestinely and conflictingly influenced strategic preferences on peacekeeping in Canada from 1991 to 2017.
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 | 0.008 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.048 | 0.041 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.019 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| 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".