RUSSIA’S PROPOSAL FOR A EUROPEAN SECURITY TREATY: ORIGINS AND PROSPECTS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 2008–2009, Dmitry Medvedev, then the President of Russia, proposed the conclusion of a European Security Treaty (EST) to provide “indivisible security” for nations from Vancouver to Vladivostok. Although this proposal came during a “reset” of Western relations with Russia, NATO governments ultimately rejected it. This thesis analyzes the treaty proposal and assesses Russian motivations for suggesting it. The thesis also explains why NATO governments rejected the EST, a proposal with provisions contrary to Western security interests. The potential for improved security cooperation between Russia and the West has been significantly limited since Vladimir Putin’s return to the presidency in 2012. Russia has annexed Crimea, destabilized eastern Ukraine, and taken other steps intended to discredit, fragment, and undermine the Western-led liberal world order. This thesis considers Western and Russian viewpoints, notably in light of developments since Medvedev proposed an EST. Although Russia has violated key elements of its proposed treaty, the Kremlin has nonetheless pursued the strategic goals it had hoped to achieve through the EST: subversion of NATO’s cohesion and collective defense ability, weakening of the transatlantic link, veto power for Moscow in the European security architecture, and dominion in Russia’s near abroad.
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 | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".