While prior work has highlighted that systematic nation-level bias in large language models (LLMs) can pose operational risks for international relations (IR) applications, many existing evaluations still lack a clearly specified unbiased reference (ground truth), limiting fully quantitative and cross-setting measurement. Using an expanded corpus of 722 official UN Security Council (UNSC) records, we measure nation-level bias with five complementary tests, thereby extending prior approaches to cover a broader set of bias expression channels: opinion ranking (WOW), association sorting (AK+-), vote simulation (PVS), opposition attribution (F-Oppose), and framing (Headliner). To enable grounded bias evaluation, we explicitly define an unbiased status for each test; in particular, for WOW and AK+-where ground truth is difficult to specify, we propose an action-based pseudo unbiased status derived from observable voting behavior to construct a quantifiable baseline. Benchmarking 4 LLMs (GPT-4o-mini, Llama 3.3-70B, Mistral-22B-Small, and Qwen3-30B) across the five permanent members of the UNSC, we find a test-agnostic macro-pattern: relative to the reference baselines defined for each test, model outputs lean toward the opposition (red) side for China and Russia and toward the supportive (blue) side for the U.K., the U.S., and France. These results underscore the need to audit IR-facing LLM deployments with grounded, multi-test benchmarks tied to explicit reference points.

Large language models with retrieval-augmented generation systematically underutilize evidence in the middle of multi-document contexts, a phenomenon known as Lost in the Middle. Existing mitigation strategies, such as document reordering and attention steering, can reduce boundary bias but remain brittle in noisy settings, where inaccurate relevance estimation and spurious documents still obscure useful evidence in central positions. We propose DuQUAD, a multi-document QA framework that mitigates positional bias through dual-view reasoning and quality-aware evidence pruning. DuQUAD combines a Local Agent guided by a Structural Fusion Score with a Global Agent that reasons over the full document set, providing both targeted evidence recovery and broad contextual understanding. The framework further filters candidate evidence using explicit quality scoring and refines it at the sentence level to reduce noise. DuQUAD consistently outperforms strong Lost-in-the-Middle mitigation baselines, including recent multi-agent and context optimization methods, improving accuracy by 3.9% on average over the strongest competing baseline and gold evidence recall by 9.4%, while substantially reducing computational cost compared to existing multi-agent frameworks.