World News Insights
1-3 Minute Gist

Browse Articles or use Lyrarc's US patented "Groups" and "Links" for new insights. A Lyrarc Group of Articles on a topic gives insights into particular angles shown in the Group Title. A Lyrarc Link shows more specific insights for 2 articles.

All Topics Articles

LyrArc brings in selected articles from many of the world's top publications.

Articles are selected by experts and you can see the gist of the important articles.


WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This interview of president Trump by Matthew Bender of the WSJ is following the release of John Bolton's book. Mr.Bolton says Mr. Trump was willing to make compromises in China policy to win reelection. Mr. Trump says Mr. Bolton's statements are not true. Mr. Bolton says in the book and in a WSJ article that Mr. Pompeo and Mr. Pence also called for Mr. Trump to censure China for its treatment of minorities in Xinjiang province. Instead he says Mr. Trump told Xi Jinping that he could go ahead with the building of camps In Xinjiang province for minorities. Mr. Trump says he signed the deal for censure of China passed by Congress because he wanted to. The reporter from WSJ say Pompeo and Pence had called for it earlier,  but that this was signed only today. Mr. Trump does say that he has changed his views on China after what he calls the Chinese plague. Mr. Bender says he is wondering if Mr. Trump thinks differently about the trade deal now. Mr. Trump says he thinks that the trade deal is a great deal but that "But ever since we got hit with the Chinese plague.I feel different about everything having to do with China." He says he is hardline on China. And he believes Bolton had no idea he could get tariffs payments by China. In his view Bolton just lacks the economic sense. Bolton is a hard liner but stupid says Trump. That he Trump is also hardliner, but with economic sense. Early on in the interview Mr. Trump says he sees a V type recovery is likely after the good jobs numbers 17.7% increase in retail sales. He also says he left a lot of tariffs in the deal, a big portion about 25%.. In any case Mr. Trump says repeatedly since the virus hit America his view his perspective has changed, a very different perspective on China, views it very differently.  Mr. Trump says he had hardly signed the deal and soon after the virus hits. So now he views the whole deal differently today, he now views the relationship with China differently. The conversation started with Mr. Trump signing about 254 nominations for new judges. He says 75% of small business is now open.  Mr Trump says his goal for a second term is to have a strong powerful economy. Mr.Bolton agrees that Mr. Trump was doing the right thing here to build a strong economy to support its policy. Only that he was making him, Pompeo, Pence and Lighthizer on trade issues, think that Trump would give in on national policy issues to China, on issues of U.S. national interest.  ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The US president has invoked emergency powers that relate to national security based on the fight against fentanyl -with 490,000 American lives lost over 12 years, 5 times that in the Vietnam and Korean Wars combined. And based on enormous trade imbalances that relate to national security with China having $1 trillion trade surplus 12 times the next highest trade surplus of $81 billion of Japan in 2007.

Note that appellate courts upheld the Nixon 10% trade tariffs based on invoking emergency powers also based on trade imbalances that time in the 1980's with Japan. The SCOTUS would be overreaching its judicial power to strike down the president on his main platform in the election, says one expert.

 

WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
WSJ Editorial Board looks at the reserves being set aside by banks and oil companies against losses in Russia as the situation in Ukraine worsens in April 2022, and has questions for CEO's that have not made preparations for a similar situation arising in China. Too much is being done on Russia "on the fly." For China 83% of American company CEO's have made no plans for supply chain action for China even after the pandemic hit and after the supply chain chaos from zero covid policies. JPMorgan, Goldman Sachs, and Citigroup have set aside $3.36 billion for Russia, according to Reuters. Shell says it may take charges of $5 billion to write down Russian assets. Exxon will take a similar charge. WSJ Editorial Board says the situation in China with respect to territorial claims on Taiwan are similar, and asks what preparation is being done for China risks. WSJ's Editorial Board says American CEO's should be calculating their supply chain and investment risk now in the event that there is a conflict in Asia. Some of this foreign investment has shifted it says as foreign direct investment as a share of China's GDP is down to 1.2% in 2020 from as high as 4.6% in 2005, according to the World Bank. Much remains to be done. Yet in 2021 despite the supply chain chaos from China's zero covid policies and rising geopolitical plus trade tensions, 83% of American companies operating in China were not considering or were not in the process of relocating their manufacturing or sourcing out of China, according to a recent American Chamber of Commerce in China business-climate survey. A figure that is the same as in 2019, a sign of complacency says the WSJ, one that could be costly, and with Russian write downs today a warning to executives that they should start preparing now for the danger that lies ahead. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Efforts to impeach two previous presidents including Democrat Clinton failed in the Senate where the vote requires a two thirds majority. The first impeachment vote against Mr. Trump failed in the Senate. In the House of Representatives only a simple majority is required. Majority Leader McConnell says he will not reconvene the Senate before president Biden takes office. Vice President Pence has refused to invoke the 25th Amendment. House Democrats have moved ahead to vote for impeachment of president Trump for the storming of the Capitol offices in Washington D.C. Their impeachment statement says president Trump's remarks that his supporters had to fight like hell or they would not have a country, constituted incitement of supporters. President Trump won 74 million votes in the last election more than in the 2016 election and lost with Mr. Biden winning 81 million votes after polarization of the country. With such a large portion of the country voting for Mr. Trump Mr. Biden risks his agenda of fighting the pandemic, and other parts of his program, becoming immersed in partisan infighting. This would also result in continuing the division of the country, and continue polarization.  About 5 House Republicans are expected to support impeachment. In the Senate some Republicans say there are impeachable offenses yet only Mr. McConnell and the senator from Utah, Mr. Mitt Romney, favor impeachment.  Mr. Trump's style of governing was controversial from the beginning of his campaign in 2016, strident and taking on critics. He governed through relative moderation compared to his aggressive posture towards critics. For instance on Mexico his remarks offended critics, yet he negotiated a new trade agreement with Mexico replacing NAFTA to ensure worker protections in Mexico, and worker jobs and wages in the U.S. Negotiations with China on trade were conducted by a seasoned veteran, Mr Lighthizer,  who was deputy Trade Representative under Reagan, and negotiated the trade agreement with Japan that worked to reduce Japanese trade surplus in the eighties. On the economy before the pandemic hit in March president Trump made significant progress reducing unemployment.      ...
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
China's government takes the first steps to create a market where credits can be traded on rights to emit carbon, burn fossil fuel and create emissions harmful to the environment and health. Big emissions come from chemical plants, steel and cement factories, and burning of coal by power plants. China is the world's largest user of coal for energy. The credits are a way for this sector of the economy to participate in cutting emissions. The provincial level program run on a pilot basis with only $400 million in credits will now transition to a larger program covering entire sectors of the Chinese economy that are responsible for carbon emissions. Experts say this program takes time to structure and the Chinese government is moving forward even though this takes time.

WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The leaders of India and China, Narendra Modi and Xi Jinping will meet at a 2 day summit in the central Chinese city of Wuhan, China, on April 27, 2018.  The meeting is significant because for the first time the 2 leaders will meet on a one on one basis for a significant part of the time without aides to get a better understanding of each other, and a get a sense of how to establish a good relationship between the 2 countries. Ma Jiali of the China Reform Forum, a think tank affiliated with the Communist Party's Central Party School says a better relationship would serve China's interests for regional calm, so that China can focus on internal issues of tackling poverty in the interior of China, tackle economic issues arising from a difficult trading relationship with the U.S. including the tariffs of the Trump administration.  China's leadership have not anticipated the decisions made by president Trump and the Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer to take a strong stand on correcting an imbalance in trade that leads to about $1 billion in trade deficit each day for the U.S. with China. Previous administrations in the U.S. have not taken action. Also at issue in the U.S. China relationship is for the first time transfer of technology for "Made in China 2025." China's earlier advances were made with a free flow of technology from the U.S. and Europe.  The last time the two leaders met was in 2014. This time the issues of border relations in the Himalayas, and the relations with China in the Indian Ocean and Pacific Ocean region, the growing relationship between Australia, U.S., India and Japan, are seen in a different light with the strong disagreements on trade relations with the U.S.  China sees a need for improving relations with India. Prime Minister Modi faces new elections in 2019 and the need to focus on infrastructure and development to win a second term in office for the ruling BJP Party.  A reduction in tensions serves the interest of both countries and leaders.   ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Indonesia is a country with a long history of Hindu and Buddhist culture before conversion to Islam through traders from Malaysia and Sufi saints in the sixteenth and seventeenth century. Hanuman and other deities from India are also part of the existing culture and traditions. Communist influence has been alien to this culture and tradition as in India. It was part of the Dutch empire in the east and a source of European trade in spices from the seventeenth century. It is also a extensive island chain of Java, Sumatra and other islands with a population of 280 million very closely linked to India culturally and with links to America since independence. Indonesia was given a great deal of importance during the Cold War with Robert Kennedy and other leaders visiting Indonesia during the period after Sukarno in the sixties. By 2000 the US engagement with China had evolved to the point that neglected India, Indonesia and the entire south east Asian region in a preference for links with China.  The British division of India led to the US links with India and Indonesia being shaped by that division and the Cold War with Russia. The confusion of the struggle against colonial rule of the British and Dutch led to leaders such as Nehru and Sukarno who compounded the difficulties of the Cold War and perpetuated with it the old British idea of a divided South Asia on a religious basis that had supported British rule and set the conditions that made it possible for a small group of English civil servants to run the country. This led to the Indian and Indonesian relationship with the US being stifled as the US struggled to rid itself of the British obsession with a divided India. Culturally India and Indonesia are part of an extended region in Asia with development aspirations and a youthful population that aspires to better infrastructure, better education, healthcare and ease of living, and the better opportunities in life. This is what migration did for Europeans who left for America for a new life on the east coast and on the prairies of America. It has little to do with the obsessions of the British and the Dutch that divided the region between the Indus and the Ganges and divided the Indonesian islands. That phase is now coming to an end as China reverts to its Communist period leadership under a new generation led by Mr. Jinping, a son of one of the veterans of the Communist Revolution of 1949. The US has to evolve its relations with India, Indonesia, Vietnam and other countries into new ties of trade, culture and technological exchange. This is needed as it winds down its close trade relations with China in its supply chain to rebuild a new supply chain after the trade wars and the pandemic revealed the deep flaws of that supply chain. What is needed is not the efforts of one changing adminstration after another, but an effort started by president Biden that will last through different administrations as the US engages with Asia in the way that it engaged with Europe after FDR and Truman for most of the twentieth century. And one that rids itself of the obsessions of divided regions from the colonial period of the Dutch and the British. The1.6 billion people in India and Indonesia share a  common aspiration of being a major part of the Free World with America. ...

China Goes to Nixon

New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Krugman points to the economic muddle that China is getting itself into. He says one way of looking at what is happening now with high inflation is that inflation is the market's way of undoing the currency manipulation that China has engaged in. By following aweak currency policy to protect export interests China has created an artificially high trade surplus. But this is now turning into a lose-lose proposition for both China and the US as market forces push wages and prices up, whittling away at any competitive advantage of China's weak currency policy. He says some estimates he has seen show that Chinese undervaluation could be gone in two or three years. Chinese consumers are asked to accept interest on savings limited to 2.75% and below inflation, with the spread designed to help banks earn their way out of bad loans made during the stimulus lending binge of 2009-2010. What is happening is a massive allocation of capital away from consumers to lending for state owned companies that have created overcapacity in many industries, and use part of this capital to engage in real estate speculation. Krugman says China may be on its way to some kind of crisis with collateral damage to the rest of the world as it is a major importer of commodities from Canada, Brazil, Argentina, Australia, and a major importer of high tech goods from Germany and the USA....
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Even China has not campaigned the way Canada, Mexico and British, American media have against DJT Tariffs because China knows it is basically about getting an even playing field when it is the only country with $1 trillion in trade in its favor in 2024, 12 times the Japanese high of $82 billion trade surplus in 2007. But why should China campaign when the American and British, German media are going to do the job for China? A simple quiz to K-12 would ask school children when is the last time a country has a $1 trillion trade surplus? Answer: Never. Greg Ip has written a few years back that the devastation of China outshoring of American factories and jobs was unlike the 1980's Japan trade invasion because of first China's size, second by the speed with which it happened at 10-14% Chinese GDP growth. There is a third Japan was an ally needing US for security and backed down, China's case is different it is challenging the US for control of the world economy and will fight this one over the long haul. Greg Ip of WSJ on the 53 countries asking to negotiate US Liberation Day April 2, 2025 Tariffs. These countries include Allies of the US in full support asking to negotiate Israel, Japan, Taiwan, South Korea, India Allies of the US in partial support asking to negotiate Britain Allies of the US not in full support asking to negotiate Germany, France Allies of the US in the past campaigning against the US, asking to negotiate Canada, Mexico Not Allies of the US, not in full support, not campaigning against the US China A look at his list tells one only one thing, mostly all trading partners except for the $146 billion exports of the US which represents exports to China are the exports that are at risk if things don't work out on tariffs. This is what the media today WSJ added this last week to the NYT, Wash. Post and the BBC, Guardian of UK, German media will not tell the reader.  The DJT Tariffs and Tariff negotiations are Lighthizer Tariff negotiations which won the fight with Japan in the 1980's over unfair trade and gaining a level playing field. Lighthizer as Deputy US Trade Representative conducted the tough negotiations with Japan. He was USTR in 2016-2020 and his Deputy Jamieson is now USTR in 2025       ...
Georgetown Law Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
US Trade Representative Lighthizer in the Report on China's Entry into WTO sees this as a mistake in the policy of president Clinton. Clinton has said that was a mistake. David Sacks raised this issue in a podcast with Larry Summers, an economist who was deputy to Robert Rubin and Deputy Treasury Secretary, then Treasury Secretary succeeding Rubin in 1999. Clinton on the advice of Rubin and Summers set up the framework for China to join the World Trade Organization without the safeguards and the setup that would prevent it using state capitalism and subisidies to build its own economy with exports, to ally with American corporations to support the outshoring of almost the entire industrial base of the US. Shocking as it sounds this has happened, had happened by 2016, when Donald Trump with the advice of USTR Lighthizer took the first steps to reverse this with Tariff policy, which was supported by president Biden, and continues in its new phase under DJT in 2025. Rubin and Summers had supported deregulation of financial markets and removal of the Glass Steagall Act by 1999. This was to led to the financial crisis of 2009 that was to be one of three body blows to the American working and middle class. The others China entering WTO without safeguards that led to deindustrializing US and loss of its manufacturing base, loss of 5 million jobs, tens of thousands of factories. And the third was the pandemic. “ . . .it seems clear that the United States erred in supporting China’s entry into the WTO on terms that have proven to be ineffective in securing China’s embrace of an open, market-oriented trade regime” 2017 USTR Report to Congress on China’s WTO ...
WSJ Original article ›
FRANCE 24 Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The astounding fact in this French FR24 report on the Paris Climate Change Agreement and country carbon emissions show that China's emissions accelerated to rise 3 fold in 2015 to about 12 billion tons of carbon emissions from about 4 billion in 2000. US remains at about 6 billion. India is at about 3 billon tons of carbon emissions, about where China was in 2000 when it had about 4 billion tons of carbon emissions. This is shown in the graph on carbon emissions from FR24. The US, European Union graph curves on tons of carbon emissions since 2000 are all flat or declining, India rising slowly from a small base, China's curve is rising straight up from a large enough base at an unbelievable and dangerous rate. What has happened and is it getting worse? China's economy expanded too quickly as globalization was accelerated by banks, and business in the US and Europe, and by the Chinese governments at the local level and the state level. This had negative consequences for US, Europe and China. The too fast growth in China at rates of 10-15% based solely on False GDP indicators that did not take into account damage to the environment and workers was that it hurt manufacturing and working class in US and Europe and contaminated the environment. This was not like growth of Japan in 1960-1980, a smaller country in the way it affected the US and European working classes. Hyper Growth at 10-15% of a large country with 1 billion people compressed over a short period, is cited by Greg Ip in the WSJ as the cause of the negative impact on America.  It hurt China through pollution of rivers and land at an accelerated pace. It hurt China as trade with US and Europe became unsustainable with the loss of manufacturing in the US and Europe leading to a trade war. From these graphs of emissions it now appears that the 3 fold rise in carbon emissions from about 4 billion tons in 2000 to about 12 billion tons in 2015 is the result of unregulated business activity of all those who preferred to push hyper growth in China purely for reasons of profit such as investment banks and corporations in US, Europe, and state or local companies in China.  This has also aggravated inequality in US, Europe and China, and hurt rural populations. Xi Jinping is attempting to correct this in China, Biden is trying to correct this in the US, and Scholz will now attempt to correct this in Germany and the European Union. It is also to be noted that China in 2000-2015 did not have the benefit of the newer technologies that India now has access to, which is why India says it is able to reduce carbon emissions per each unit of GDP by 35% from 2005 levels by 2030. It is this efficiency in producing units of GDP with newer and newer technologies that China lacked in its period of hyper growth 2000-2015 that now looks to have hurt China- with overflow of highly polluting steel mills and other factories which it would prudently and wisely have cut back on. Looking back at this period one sees the wholesale transfer of highly polluting plants in Germany being sold and put up in China, a poor developing country in 2000. Was this a good decision for Germany or for China? In this way the banks and large corporations in the US and Europe who use economic indicators that are limited such as dollar profits, without overall indicators that include negative effect damage to the environment that requires huge investments to correct, problems of trade wars leading to political conflicts, are acting like a person walking blindly in one direction.  With some foresight China and all its trading partners would have done better with slower but more careful Chinese growth of 7-8% that would have better met societal goals in US, Europe and China, avoiding high carbon emissions segments of industries from Day 1. Jinping is doing this in China, and Biden is doing this in the US- cutting out highly polluting factories and segments of industries- but in a climate of mutual distrust, which could have benefitted the world when conducted in a climate of cooperation and trust. The pandemic made the situation even more difficult. Power shortages in factories and blackouts in Chinese cities have led to a reversal of policies on use of coal in China months before the COP26 Glasgow conference and G-20 summit leaving a huge gap. Without the presence of Xi Jinping at COP26 in Glasgow and with Chinese participation uncertain significant progress on climate change is elusive. Estimates by US Renewable Energy Agency is that it would cost $131 trillion to pay for limiting emissions to global warming of 1.5 degrees Celsius. Some major share of this cost can be attributed to the increase from about 4 billion tons in 2000 of carbon emissions in China to about 12 billion tons in 2015, increase by 3 times. One can clearly see from this sudden jump in carbon emissions in China that policies of hyper growth with unregulated polluting industries adding to GDP growth figures was bad policy for China, bad policy for US, and Europe, even if it offered temporary profits for individual companies. India has the advantage of learning from this experience and charting its own wiser course as a partner with US, Europe and Japan and by Modi's vigorous efforts in renewable energy. The lesson- look at all indicators of progress, including climate and society, not just economic indicators in profit or dollar terms, take the tough decisions early in regulating polluting companies and industry segments, and bring full and active public participation with transparent access to data on climate damaging activity in real time because climate and the environment we live in free of polluting substances belongs to all the people, belongs to all life on the planet from trees to animals and birds, not companies that can choose to ignore it. ...
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
President Trump says he will reconsider his decision not to join the Trans Pacific Partnership. Trump says he will look for a "substantially better" deal that the one negotiated by president Obama. Trump added that the U.S. already has bilateral trade deals with six of the eleven nations in the TPP and negotiations are taking place with Japan a country with which the U.S. had difficulties in trade. This change of mind comes as Republicans in Congress and other groups including farm exporters are calling for using TPP as a way to pressure China. Wheat exporters in the U.S. say joining TPP would give them a level playing field with Australia and Canada for exports. This means reopening the negotiations with Japan conducted by the Obama administration and seeking more concessions from Japan. Japan's chief cabinet secretary says Japan has made all the concessions it could.  U.S. president Trump would have to come up with a better deal to justify joining TPP.

The Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The US envoy to Belarus responds to overtures from Belarus's leader Lukashenko for improved relations, release of hundreds of political prisoners including the husband of a opposition leader who is thought to have won the last Belarus open elections in 2020. Today it is not realized that politicians with lack of vision or foresight - Bush, Obama, Merkel, failed to grasp that in 2020 two events happened that were linked- the Belarus electons bringing another pro-EU government on Russia's border which was squashed before it could take office and the pro-democracy movement in Hong Kong also squashed in 2020 by China PRC. Crimea was made part of Russia in 2014 when Ukrainian protesters in Kviv and Lviv near Poland ousted the government of pro Russia leader Yanukovych in the Maidan revolution. Russia under Putin responded 2014-2020 with a simmering effort to take parts of eastern Ukraine that were close to and sympathetic to Russia. This was an effort to counter NATO or pro-EU countries coming to Russia's borders in the way JFK opposed pro-Russian regime in Cuba. Obama and Merkel never understood or grasped this or were too involved in the eurozone, migration crises (Merkel) or war in Afghanistan (Obama). The result was that in 2020 Russia helped squash the election results in Belarus with another pro-EU government impending. Within 2 years Russia under Putin with tacit Chinese support invaded Ukraine in Feb 2022. Belarus shares a border with Russia and it is closely allied with Russia in the Eurasian Economic Zone that includes former Soviet Bloc countries such as Kazakhstan. Gradually following the recovery of the Russian economy by 2010 the emphasis shifted to create something similar to the Soviet Union, a bloc of countries in central Asia and in Eastern Europe that are part of a Russian sphere of influence. For much of the period of the Obama/ Merkel administrations in US and Germany this was ignored as most of the politicians never gave Russia the importance it sought, not accepting that the economic power was not measured only in GDP- also in science and technology, nuclear technologies, space, in energy resources, and Russia's position in Northern/Central Europe and Central Asia since 1700.  It is this situation that the DJT administration faced with US challenges of the Mexican and Venezuelan drug and people trafficking in the western hemisphere has responded with the Monroe Doctrine to reassert American influence in Latin America by respecting Russia's effort to have some measure of influence on its borders, that the US seeks on it's borders. Without Russian or Chinese intervention in Latin America and with the the Monroe Doctrine in place America can protect the interests of the American people and the people of Latin America for free and good government. What Bush, Obama, Merkel lost sight of is that by each power having some strong measure of influence in their regions, and the tendencies for benevolent influence put in place, there is significantly more room for respecting the hopes and aspirations of people in their regions through democratic or other people oriented forms of government than by the situation in which economically the US was dominant after the fall of the Berlin Wall but other influences would lead to US decline- open but not free trade with China, and the recovery of the Russian economy, drug and people trafficking by gangs in Latin America where the Monroe Doctrine for US leadership had prevailed till the 1960's. ...
DW.COM Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This opinion in DW.com says Donald Trump has done exactly the opposite of what he said during the election campaign when he was severely critical of China on trade issues. This report cites the many statements in some detail made by Trump about China. During a recent visit to China he says president Trump seemed to go out of his way to show agreement with president Jinping, quite the reverse of what he said he would do during the election campaign. U.S. influence and prestige is seen as declining as a result of president Trump's policies.

The Hindu Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Indian prime minister Modi shown in a meeting together with Biden of the US, Fumio Kishida of Japan and Albanese of Australia at the Izumi Gallery in Tokyo during the announcement of the joint efforts for launching and promoting the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework for Prosperity. The IPEF led by the US will have four pillars of trade and supply chain resiliency, clean energy and climate change action, taxes to promote investment in infrastructure, and good governance. Seven of 10 members of ASEAN have joined including Indonesia. India is a key partner of US and Japan for the new IPEF economic alliance. Prime Minister Modi of India says about IPEF- "India will work together with its IPEF partners to build an inclusive and flexible Indo-Pacific Economic Framework. I believe that resilient supply chains must be based on three pillar foundation of trust, transparency and timeliness, and I am sure that this framework will make these pillars strong and lead to prosperity, peace and prosperity in the Indo-Pacific region." Attracting large investments in India and other reliable partners in a new supply chain that shifts out of China are part of the Biden plan working together with Japan and South Korea. Investments directly into the US are also part of the same plan. Gina Raimondo US Commerce Minister says- "I would say, especially as businesses are beginning to increasingly look for alternatives to China, the countries in the Indo-Pacific Framework will be more reliable partners for US businesses." US National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan says the IPEF is intended to boost US manufacturing. By boosting US manufacturing and technological advancement with investments inside the US that directly benefit American workers and families the IPEF will serve the US and the free world in ways that will shape the coming decades to 2030 and 2040. With investments in the US will come investments in India as a reliable manufacturing partner to replace China by 2030 is envisioned by Jake Sullivan and president Biden. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The aggressive effort of the US central bank, the Federal Reserve, to increase interest rates to dampen inflation will have an effect on Asian currencies and trade. The Japanese yen lost 14% of its value and the Korean won 8%, Chinese yuan 5% since the beginning of 2022. This is a result of the widening gap between interest rates in the US and Japan where the interest rates have not been increased due to mild inflation.  Asian trade is done in US dollars and exports to the US are invoiced in dollars. Citigroup says about three quarters of trade in Asia-Pacific is invoiced in dollars. Weaker currencies would translate into higher effective prices for imported commodities - energy and food. This pushes up domestic inflation and hurts manufacturing.   Add to this a shift in the US demand from goods into services in 2022 and there is weaker external demand for the economies of Asia. This will exacerbate the slowdown in Asian economies. Many countries such as South Korea and Thailand have increased their external borrowing in dollars. Debt service ratio was 21% in South Korea and 14.5% in Thailand, according to Bank for International Settlements. Years of low rates allowed governments in Asia to borrow more without incurring high interest bills. Now that situation is changing quickly and will result in difficulties for South Korea and Thailand says this report in WSJ. In the last 10 years Asian economies excluding China increased debt to GDP ratios by 15 percentage points, according to Gavekal. The result might not be debt crises as in Sri Lanka but painful slowdowns in economy with combination of loss in external demand from the US and higher inflation, higher interest bills. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Germany is trying not to choose sides in the trade and security disputes between China and the U.S. Yet it owes a lot to the U.S. from the days of the Marshall Plan and U.S. taking on the role of defending Germany after the Berlin Wall. China was then a partner with the Soviet Union in the Cold War.  Today China is Germany's top market for its car industry. Yet the U.S. export market is much larger than China at $119 billion with China's at $96 billion. In Germany 28% of jobs are linked to exports, and in manufacturing this goes up to 56%, according to Germany Ministry of Economic Affairs. Germany supplied much of the factory  equipment from its engineering companies and the infrastructure that powered up the China transformation. A transformation now underway in India.  There are signs of a shift as engineering companies in Germany grew faster in the U.S. than China, increasing by 6-10% a year. India remains a key growth market for Germany over the next 10-15 years as growth in China slows and India accelerates with its younger demographics and investment in infrastructure. Much of the infrastructure in China is built and it is approaching the saturation Japan reached in the 1990's with additional investments adding little in the way of productivity. Longer term Germany has more potential for growth in countries in South and South East Asia  that will need to make huge investments in infrastructure and technology for manufacturing to meet the aspirations of the people there. Other issues related to freedom going back to the Berlin Wall and the rebuilding of Germany after World War II will emerge. German companies are running out of patience says this report in the WSJ with the bureaucratic obstacles, forced technology transfers, subsidies by state model to extinguish competition, and protectionist approach to home markets, even as state funded companies in China put other companies in Europe, Asia and the U.S. at a disadvantage. Germany will need to transition to a shift in its global relations, a process that is only now taking place. Just as with austerity policies in which it has now made the shift from going with the northern European countries (Sweden, Denmark, Netherlands, Finland) to the Southern European (France, Italy, Spain) in favor of common solidarity even at the short term cost of common debt, Germany now is facing the shift for solidarity with the U.S. for its support of Germany from the period of the Berlin Wall in the 1950's, for the U.S. and European solidarity in the face of the post-coronavirus world. The U.S. showing its generosity and openness to Germany and war torn Europe even as it took on the added responsibilities for creating a new alliance with Europe.   ...
Original article ›

Will China Break?

New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Krugman points to some striking facts about China in 2011. Consumer spending in China is only 35% of GDP and has declined over the years. There are no signs of rebalancing the economy away from exports by increasing consumer spending. China's dependence on exports for trade surpluses is greater than ever. Beyond this there is another disturbing fact. With weak consumer spending and heavy investment spending at about half of GDP, Kugman raises the question where is all that increase in spending going? Real estate investment takes up about half of the increase in investment spending, as the share of GDP of real estate investment almost doubles compared to figures for 2000. Much of the rest of the increase Krugman attributes to firms selling to the construction industry. The speculative fever, the corruption at the local level, the shadow banking system which is not protected and unsupervised, the poor quality of statistics, suggest a bubble phenomena that may not be under control of policy makers, and risks damaging China economy and the world economy in 2012-2013. After all China's economic and financial planners and banks are no better than America's or Japan's, where asset bubbles burst causing serious damage....
The Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Comment by a former Tory leader, Sir Ian Duncan Smith, on negotiations with the European Union's Ursula Leyen, show how much the term sovereignty has become the word on which everything depends. Smith said on December 10 about the EU demands that Britain adhere to EU environmental and other rules after leaving the EU, "either Britain is sovereign, or it is not."  The word sovereign is discussed in this context in this Times analysis. The word comes from the old French word "sovereinete" during the period when the King's authority was being contested by feudal lords in 16th century France. The Oxford dictionary defines it as the authority of a state to govern itself, and to do this without outside interference. Tory leaders such as David Davis and others including Smith see this as meaning making your own laws. For the European Union to insist on its laws being primary and British law asked to conform with EU law making it secondary, would not only be outside interference, but also divided authority. Older French and British political philosophers Hobbes and Rousseau see this as divided authority. Even though the meaning has changed in modern times, the essential definition in the Oxford Dictionary remains undivided authority. Which is why these Tory leaders insist on the original definition as the right one. Behind the wrangling there is the sense among Leavers that Britain could do better in economic terms by setting its own direction, and doing business its way. How would a new economic power in India by 2030 affect Britain, would it create many more opportunities for Britain to grow because of its history and cultural ties. Could the relationship with the U.S. provide more opportunities for growth? What about French indifference and even disdain of Britain, does Britain have other options? Isn't the European Union merely a Franco-German alliance led politically by France and economically by Germany, and propelled by their three wars since 1871, with a bunch of European countries added in, and what has Britain got to do with it? Closer to the negotiations with Leyen there is also the question - isn't France trying to make certain with its demand that Britain not violate EU law, that Britain's ingenuity and free wheeling spirit outside the European Union does not let it grow faster than France? Where one gets Boris Johnson's immediate reply that Britain is better off not being stuck inside "EU's regulatory orbit."   At the other end of the world you have India with "Atman Nirbhar Bharat" calling for a self-reliant economy and taking the time for transitioning out of the trade relationship with China, at short term cost and long term advantage. Britain is closely watching India as it makes big strides in developing infrastructure, in renewable energy, and setting a bold vision for the future. Even France is mapping out a pathway to self-reliant economy as it looks at ways to bring production home after the pandemic. The pandemic has only reinforced the drive to be self-reliant. ...
The Financial Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
There is a sense of cognitive dissonance in the states of former East Germany, known as the GDR or German Democratic Republic in the Soviet Union period from 1950's to 1990. The 5 states that formed the GDR continued to build close ties with Russia after the fall of the Berlin Wall, in the perception that this would build good long term relations. The crisis in Ukraine with border states of the Soviet Union opting in favor of close ties with the European Union and not Russia have disrupted the economic relations between the Federal Republic of Germany and Russia. As long as Russia needed the economic ties to build its economy and standard of living the political issues posed by NATO expansion and EU expansion were set aside by Putin and political parties within Russia. The very ties that were supposed to usher in an era of peace in Europe helped strengthen the Russian and Chinese economies. Leading to a point where these two economies were strong enough by 2021 in the midst of the waning pandemic to  assert themselves on political issues where serious differences existed such as expansion of NATO and Taiwan. When the economic relations such as making China a manufacturing powerhouse  was the path taken by American and European business in 1990's, business interests were focused on the declining quality and high wages demanded by unions and workers in the US and Germany. This could be personally witnessed at Apple's factory in Colorado Springs where quality was failing badly in the 1990's. Apple when Steve Jobs returned in 1997 adopted a China manufacturing strategy when its manufacturing operations in the US failed to deliver the quality and cost structure needed for it to expand. The high margins with low costs of manufacturing in China was the strategy adopted by Steve Jobs to compete with Microsoft and turbocharge its expansion. Soon other companies followed. A similar process happened in economic ties with Russia on a smaller scale. Two decades of such expansion whittled down American manufacturing, hurt American workers, hurt European manufacturing and European workers.  This process could not continue- yellow vest protests in France, the protest vote in US midwestern states in recent elections, the protest votes in German elections and fragmentation of parties, made this clear. The US imposed trade tariffs on Chinese products and moved to restrict flow of technologies to China under the Trump administration, accelerated by the Biden administration. President Xi was once of the view that China's ties with the US were important "thousand fold" in the period as late as 2010. Yet this lopsided trade relationship was not beneficial to American workers or American interests as a technologically advanced leader. It is true that American workers and engineers at Apple had failed to ensure American quality competitiveness in the 1980's into 1990's, yet no advanced country or its business can come up with a false narrative that cedes its manufacturing leadership and jobs for the working class of its country. That false narrative is being challenged today by Mr. Biden, Mr. Scholz, and all American and German political parties, and by Mr. Modi with Atman Nirbhar Bharat for local manufacturing. The integration one sees of the port of Hamburg as Chinese export hub with China's economy is one aspect of what has happened. A new leadership is taking its place in Europe and in America that sees clearly the false narrative. The visit of the new Danish prime minister to India is the beginning of the effort to set up a new logistics relationship with South and South East Asia, as Denmark's Maersk is a world leader in shipping logistics for exports and manufacturing. The planned Noida logistics center outside of New Delhi under Gati Shakti integrated development is part of the change happening today as a new supply chain is being built. The unwinding of the one sided trade relationship with China, and its related relationship on energy with Russia, led to the changing perception in Russia and China of the value of the relationship. Political relations superseded economic and cultural relations during Putin's second phase and Xi's second phase with assertive attitudes on NATO, and on Hong Kong, Taiwan under Xi and Putin 2.0. As could be expected Germany and the US were caught flat footed as leaders who were cast in the mold of Putin as a Soviet representative in Dresden, and Xi with his father leading the Communist struggle in the 1930's and 1940's against Chiangkaishek, acted in ways that reflected the Soviet period. Chiang left for Taiwan in 1948 when Mao-tse-tung setup the People's Republic of China. Taiwan and Hong Kong remained important in the perceptions of Xi 2.0, in the effort to build "China Dream" and erase last vestiges of what in Soviet times were seen as western colonialism. US and EU particularly Business and the new IT telecom Business failed to grasp these matters, and historical events such as the opium wars of the 1850's. Business and cultural interests lacked both the inclination to learn and the knowledge of these events in Chinese history and its relations with colonial powers Britain and Japan, and also Russia. In 1900 the Boxer rebellion against ceding Chinese ports to colonial powers Britain, Japan, Russia, ended with permanent colonial settlements in Hong Kong, Shanghai, Tsingtao, other Chinese ports. Chinese rejuvenation in the mind of leaders such as Xi from the second generation of Communist leadership, means putting this behind, leading to the action taken in Hong Kong. In some ways as some observers have commented it is as much a problem of the sluggishness of American and European thinking, particularly business interests including in Taiwan, post British Hong Kong, and ignorance of recent Chinese history which was mistakenly thought not to exist or forgotten. This is as much of a problem as the action taken by Putin and moves by Xi Jinping. The great democracies such as India, Indonesia, Bangladesh, were ignored as American and European business interests integrated the American and German economies with China's. In terms of population the population of these regions and related parts of South East Asia such as Malaysia and Vietnam which have a shared cultural history is about 1.5 times the population of China. Travelling through the parts of India's largest state Uttar Pradesh, an Madhya Pradesh one finds how much American and European business interests have failed both their own interests, their own workers and failed the great democracies of the world, by not only not investing in the democracies of Asia, and also of Africa and Latin America and bought into a narrative of China which no longer holds true and may never have been true all along. This is starkly evident in a once in a century pandemic in these great democracies of the world. These democracies have been left to fend for themselves during the pandemic and their leaders facing false narratives in the media such as the BBC and American media outlets even on issues such as vaccination of the largest part of the world's people.           ...
The Guardian Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Russia has 600 billion dollars in reserves and with oil prices above $100, with the Ukraine conflict lifting oil prices for Russian oil exports, there is little that the US and Europe have done to prepare for this situation. The Merkel years were essentially wasted in building a trade based relationship on cheap Russian gas supplies, and the wasted resources under Bush and Obama in two wars in Iraq and Afghanistan only distracted the US from the major issues relating to China and Europe that it now faces. 

The need is for a new overall structure to be built- for social structure supporting all aspects of infrastructure, and stronger supply chains with local manufacturing. And international structures that include India and other nations of Asia and Latin America, Africa, that would be a framework for the future- a broader framework for peaceful relations.

 

WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The EU with its $15.4 trillion economy is a bloc comparable in size to the U.S. $19.4 trillion economy. The French State Secretary for Europe, Mr. Lemoyne, says EU does not need to be worried about the way the USMCA, new version of NAFTA was negotiated with pressure from president Trump, as the Europeans are the largest trading power in the world. The EU exports to the U.S. are $252 billion, and up 5% in the seven months of 2018 over the preceding period. The U.S. by comparison exports $153 billion which has remained at the same level with a $600 million decline in the same period in 2018.  President Trump has put pressure on the EU to help improve the trade imbalance. Soya bean exports are pointed to by the EU as this has doubled in 2018, after China responded to U.S. sanctions by limiting soyabean imports. President Trump has stated his intention to impose tariffs on European car imports - trade worth $60 billion- to get the EU to offer concessions.  ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
China's manufacturing sector contracts in June with the PMI index dropping below 50 - to 49.0.  Exports were also coming in lower. Experts say the increase in interest rates by the US is reducing imports of Chinese goods into the US. This comes as local governments are strained in their finances by $900 billion, and a budding revolt is taking place from property buyers with developers in financial trouble, as reported in the WSJ. Psychological hurdles now loom in the loss of confidence in the public in the property sector, loss of confidence of foreign investors with many constraints in operating, mental health issues for the population in many cities with the covid lockdowns.   The growth has slowed to 0.4% and there is now a realization dawning that there was overdependence both on property sector and foreign investment that set up new factories offshored from the US and Europe that alienated the public in these countries. Unlike wih the situation of Japan in the sixties and seventies for modernizing its economy growth of the scale China was pushed into by misguided and self interested  business interests in the US including its investment banks and local government officials in China without restraint by the central government in Beijing, ultimately led to trade friction and permanent damage to US China friendly relations. Communities in the US and the EU simply could not cope with the hyper growth from hyper shift of factories from the home countries to China that pushed this hyper growth. The property sector played the same role in the domestic front with too big a burden carried by it resulting in hyper growth. This did not have to happen. It happened because of a lack of understanding that this would have consequences in the longer run which is now showing up. ...

Support LyrArc

We took a different way to help millions around the world build educated informed mindsets that affects and shapes their lives. For a future that is open, global and digital, with everyone having access to high quality information. We believe in the renewal of America, renewal of Europe, the renewal of India, the rest of Asia, Latin America and Africa. The renewal of our supply chains, health, education, infrastructure, as we rebuild our countries after the pandemic. Literacy and knowledge we believe cannot thrive and grow in a world of web bots, web crawlers, or AI. This requires human curiosity, human learning, and human imagination. We take as inspiration the saying- “One has to be free, and as broad as sky. One has to have a mind that is crystal clear, only then can truth shine in it.” Every contribution whether big or small is precious- in this crisis and ahead.

Support Lyrarc from as small as $1


Copyright © 2006 - 2026 Intelilinks LLC
Terms and Conditions | Copyright Policy | Privacy Policy | Contact Us