LyrArc Article Gist
Much of what is written here about Xi Jinping pursuing Chinese socialist vision was known since he became president in 2013 when China's Communist party was losing its appeal, and efforts were made to seize power within the communist party by a leader in the western province of Chongqing. Bo Xi Lai attempted to take advantage of the situation with appeals to the working class and without any genuine commitment beyond a power grab. It was well known that Xi Jinping is a son of one of the veterans of the Communist party under Mao, Xi Zhongxun, unlike leaders who followed premier Deng Xiaoping such as Jiang Zemin. Zemin was a relatively unknown figure who was in university during the crucial period of 1947-49 when Mao came to power in mainland China. It would not be correct to say that little was known about Xi's own ideas about socialism as the long term answer to China's problems. Xi also came in as president at a time when the Communist party was losing its appeal to working class people after three administrations that followed premier Den Xiaoping. These three administrations followed a form of state capitalism that allowed companies to pollute the environment, compete without any regulations, and allowed to operate without any controls as long as they pursued growth aggressively and expanded the economy.There was an effort by Communist party regional leader in western Chinese province of Chongqing, Bo Xi Lai, to use this as an opportunity to grab power in China. During his first year as president Xi had to resolve this issue by having a court trial after revelations of corruption and misuse of power by Bo Xi Lai.  Xi's father Zhongxun's role in the revolutionary movement offers clues to Xi's own convictions and faith in the party. Zhongxun was a communist soldier who set up the revolutionary base areas in Shanxi-Gansu northwest border region of China that provided a refuge for Mao's army following the Long March. Other clues come from Zhongxun's role as head of propaganda during the period after 1944 and in 1952. Xi's family background particularly on his mother's side shows a fervent commitment to Chinese socialist vision during the chaotic years when the Japanese invaded China and Chiang Kai-Shek's nationalist forces failed to defend China's sovereignty. One reason Xi has been less understood is that little attention is paid to Xi's mother, Qi Xin who was highly educated and fervently believed in Chinese socialism and nationalist spirit during the Japanese invasion in 1938. In fact Qi Xin had to leave middle school after the Japanese took over Beijing. She joined the Counter Japanese Political and Military University to continue education and in 1941 attended the Central Party school. She met Xi's father Zhongxun in 1944. In 1953 she enrolled in the Marx School of Communism, and it was her position at the school that offered her husband added protection during the Cultural Revolution that affected Deng Xiaoping and others. With such a history in the 1930's, 1940's, and 1950's it is likely that Xi was profoundly influenced by his father's role in the revolutionary movement, and his mother's faith in socialism with national spirit as the way to protect against the foreign invasions. It would now appear that by the time Xi joined the Politburo in 2003 there was no question about the future course China would take given the role of his parents, and the events of 1938 the fall of Beijing, his mother having to flee, and the events that followed. Xi showed resilience during the period of the Great Proletarian Revolution when he was sent to the villages at a time when he would be studying in school and college. He was sent to an agricultural commune in largely rural Shanxi province where he worked as a manual laborer alongside other people and developed a relationship with the local farmers. Unlike other leaders during that period which could even be said about premier Deng Xiaoping in 1989, Xi took a different lesson from this experience largely because his father and mother were committed to the socialist vision for the long run. His father was still not fully rehabilitated by premier Chou en-lai when Xi was allowed to enter Beijing's Tsinghua University in 1975. He studied chemical engineering at Tsinghua graduating in 1979. Upon graduation he worked as a assistant for 3 years to a vice premier who was minister of defense. He then left Beijing for Hebei province to work as a deputy secretary of the provincial CCP. He was made Mayor of Xiamen, then governor of Fujian province in 1999 where he tackled environmental conservation before moving to Zheziang province. His father passed away in 2002 and it would appear that he was carefully trained in different provinces instead of staying in Beijing, for a position of national leadership. Xi got his break in 2007 when the upper leadership of Shanghai city was tainted in a wide ranging pension fund scheme. He was made party secretary for Shanghai. This was the position Jiang Zemin had held before he succeeded premier Deng Xiaoping. In only a few months in October 2007 Xi was made one of the 8 Politburo members, ready to succeed Hu Jintao as president. Xi's perception of being sent to the villages and making it to university education was that it was part of the long run socialist struggle, with pain that his father had also endured as simply a phase in which things would be right in the end. Xi's mother comes across as a resilient figure and one who had herself gone through the struggles of the 1930's and aided her husband on one occasion. Some of this resilience could have been passed on to the son. Xi's wife is a zealous participant in Chinese dance and music performances that created enthusiasm for the Chinese socialist revolution from the 1930's period. In his conversations  with colleagues in the party, in culture and temperament, Xi has been forthright about this background and his style of work.  Xi is unlike premier Deng and the presidents who succeeded him such as Hu Jintao mentored by a former mayor of Shanghai Jiang Zemin who came to power in 1989. Xi is more in line with the leaders around Mao like his father in his outlook and thinking, with a cautious temperament that comes from years going through ups and downs of political struggles. He is once said to have responded with dismay about being in a top position in the government knowing how precarious this had been for his father. The education at Tsinghua, his engineering background, and his easy familiarity with farmers in the provinces, mean that he understands China and its history well enough to have the confidence to shape Chinese policies in a way that none of his predecessors had except Mao, premier Chou-en-lai, Liu Shao Chi and a few veterans from that time in the 1930's. That Xi waited patiently for so long to gradually assert his ideas about socialist vision for China may be the surprising part of his behaviour till 2021.  It may be that he wanted to make the changes only after he could persuade party leaders and colleagues of his vision and long run goals. And because the Chinese economy had grown so large that it would take time to steer the ship in a different direction for the long term. In most of the negotiations with president Trump he cautiously let trade negotiators handle the situation, all the time learning about how to tackle problems of China's relationship with US and Europe. US president Biden also has a vision that is veering towards a socialist perspective in terms of bringing gains of progress to workers and families. So does Mr. Trump, Mr. Boris Johnson in UK, and Social Democrat's Scholz in Germany. It is both economic and political as Mr. Xi is quoted as saying in this WSJ report. The necessities of such action are both economic, social and politically driven as capitalism has veered way off course.  In this report it is mentioned that Soho China 40% stake was taken by a large capital markets firm in New York in the hope of large gains, as Soho China developer was a tycoon who wanted to leave China. Seeing it as not favorable to his company following events in Hong Kong. This behaviour of capital markets groups in New York and tech companies in Silicon Valley, driven by profits and not aware of the social and economic problems of working class American families is a problem in the US and in Europe. It is also what has driven so many large tech companies to expand manufacturing operations in China, that hurt US manufacturing capabilities and American workers jobs- an issue raised by president Trump and taken up by president Biden. Biden has already moved to make Intel Corporation change its plans and invest in American manufacturing technologies in a quietly implemented U turn. US president Biden is left with the unenviable job of solving this huge problem during the pandemic. He has also committed to a somewhat socialistic vision with a $3.5 trillion plan for workers and families, as has vice chancellor Scholz in Germany with his own version of programs, after the failures of unregulated forms of capitalism. Scholz goes so far as to say his mission is to show that there is really no such thing as a self-made man, that it is help from society, his fellow citizens, and government, that makes it possible for him to do his work. In a sense the world is shifting away from Reagan forms of capitalism without regulation after seeing disastrous results during the pandemic. Not just China. Some form of government guidance and regulations are now seen as essential in China, the US, UK, Germany and India for a better society and a better, healthier life, and for opportunity for all in each country.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
One of the problems facing the Republican People's Party, the CHP, is how to connect with religious voters. CHP is the party that is most closely associated with modern Turkey's founder, Kemal Ataturk. CHP was the main party in Turkey till the recent dominance of the AKP Party in elections. AKP drew support from the more religious and rural population in the parts of Turkey outside cities such as Ankara and Istanbul. CHP rarely identified itself with street protest and remained aloof from ordinary people making it hard for it to contest elections against the AKP - winning Ankara and Istanbul but losing the elections in the last decade. The AKP also allied itself with Turkey's Ottoman heritage and appealed to nationalist sentiment against a conservative aloof CHP leading to a split in Turkey between the secular urban and the religious minded more rural people. CHP also did not work with minorities such as the Kurds to build a broader coalition. This is changing with the march from Ankara to Istanbul led by CHP leader Kilicdaroglu. The march came after the justice system appeared to be allied with president Erdogan, and a 25 year sentence was given to one of Kilicdaroglu's deputies. Erdogan now appoints the judges in the judiciary and the crackdown on the opposition since the failed coup of 2016, has led to a sense that Turkey is now run as a one party state. An estimated 1.5 million Turks participated in the rally in Istanbul, according to DW, showing that the opposition is forming to the arbitrary rule since the emergency powers assumed by the president. For the last decade Erdogan and the AKP Party formed the government. What changed since 2016 is the new constitution that gives new powers to the president and the arbitrary rule since the crackdown on the opposition that intensified after 2014, and which has increased since the failed coup in 2016.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Bill Keller of the NYT points out that getting Syria right means getting over the obsession over what went wrong in Iraq and looking objectively at the situation in Syria. He points to the failure of president Obama in grasping what the Assad regime has done to Syria, the refugees in Jordan, the use of artillery and air raids on civilian population, and inviting the support by fundmentalist Islamic countries such as Saudi Arabia in the absence of U.S. and European support, making delay after delay by president Obama leading to a paralysis in response. Leaving the question for the future which was a worse U.S. response- the hasty action in Iraq or the paralysis in Syria?

LyrArc Article Gist
Ben Hubbard of the NYT describes the problems created by the Russian bombing campaing in Syria for the civilian population, and the lack of any changes on the ground. Russia may soon be looking for a way out from its involvement in the region, says Hubbard, because of the costs of such an involvement over time.

LyrArc Article Gist
This WSJ editorial says president Obama's inaction, including the smaller step of not putting in place a safe zone in Syria, comes at a price for Liberals. The recent action by Governors in Michigan and other states turning down Syrian refugees, it says is one of the moral consequences of Obama's policies. For Liberals it says a policy of inaction and turning America's back to the needs of ordinary Syrians during the Arab Spring is not neutral, it also has consequences. The consequences for Liberals is the steady stream of refugees to Europe, and the greater intolerance in western societies as the safe havens created by these policies in the Middle East lead to terrorist actions in Europe or the U.S. In short doing little or nothing carries risks for the kind of society liberals want to see. Through developing policy in response to the Bush Administration's policies the Obama administration makes a series of errors of its own that compromise liberal values, including the collapse of the Arab Spring without American and western support, and the creation of a huge refugee crisis in Syria, Iraq, with a spillover to Jordan and Turkey, and further spillover to Europe. Liberals in Europe also face a similiar situation, including Liberals in France....

LyrArc Article Gist
Hoover Institution scholar Fouad Ajami describes in this essay how a more active policy by the Obama administration could have prevented the chaotic situation in the Middle East, the sectarian conflict, the breakup of Syria and Iraq, the increase in terrorism eventually affecting France and the U.S., and the refugee crisis in Europe. This active policy he says would have included- keeping some presence in Iraq, and taking action to prevent the spread of the conflict by restraining regional and foreign powers and terrorism.

LyrArc Article Gist
Scott Anderson of the NYT provides an indepth look at the Arab World and its fragmentation through the eyes of five people from each part of the Arab world- Egyptian, Kurd, Syrian, Iraqi and Jordanian. He says the countries that fell apart are precisely the ones that were formed by the British and the French, and Italy, following the defeat of the Ottoman Empire  using divide and rule policies- Britain in Iraq, France in Syria, and Italy in Libya- without much thought given to setting up viable nation states. This is why Iraq has a Sunni-Shia divide, Syria has similar divisions, and Libya with a largely tribal based structure, never really held together after the colonial powers left, and were held together only by strong dictators. Today's problems trace back to these historical events. This is complicated by the largely young demographic and restlessness of the people for change coupled with problems of underdevelopment in education, tribal loyalties, religious loyalties, and lack of political and social structures that could keep the countries together as change and transition to democratic processes took place. The role of the military further complicated matters in Egypt. Even Iran experienced these divisions because of the intervention of the great powers including Russia in Iran since 1900, leading to swings between liberal governments, foreign power supported governments, and a swing back to religious leadership as at present. This is one view of the region, others are presented by Ramadan (Oxford),  Bernard Lewis (Princeton), and leaders in Qatar and Emirates, other experts, some of whom point to the failure in leadership and the elites to find solutions to the problems of underdevelopment, in education, health, infrastructure, and aspirations for a voice in their governance. As the same divisions left by colonial powers affected Asia- in India, China, and Korea, but a larger vision of progress prevailed through crises and difficulties.        ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The Obama administration makes the decision on June 13, 2013, to supply arms to Syrian opposition forces to the Assad regime and enforce a limited no-fly zone inside Syria. The decision comes as forces of the Assad regime make gains over poorly armed opposition forces and threaten the Syrian opposition's base in the city of Aleppo.

LyrArc Article Gist
The NYT editorial in April 2013 supporting a cautious response in Syria as it reports the use of chemical weapons by the Assad government.

LyrArc Article Gist
Gen. Keane and Pletka say action by the U.S. is needed in 2013 to render ineffective the airdefense system and runways used by warplanes of the Assad regime. They emphasize that the U.S. has the technology and capacity to do this even with the Russian systems added in Syria. The lack of a U.S. response in the face of the Assad regime's attacks on civilian populations and use of chemical weapons, the support to the U.S. from the Arab world and Turkey, and the huge refugee problems in Jordan and Turkey, say Keane and Pletka, will lead to creating a worse situation than the relatively small risks of destroying the runways for Assad's warplanes and the airdefense system.

LyrArc Article Gist
The faltering approach on Syria of the Obama administration and the events that lead to the decision on June 13, 2013, to provide arms to the opposition forces.

LyrArc Article Gist
Bill Keller compares the situation in 1940 with that of today. He sees isolationist tendencies in the U.S. today similiar to that which prevailed in the U.S. in 1940 when Roosevelt faced the Nazi invasion of Europe.

LyrArc Article Gist
Sohrab Ahmari of the WSJ talks to Masrour Barzani at a forward base on the Syria-Iraq border in Dec. 2015, at a time when terrorist attacks in France and the U.S. are shifting public opinion in the UK, Germany and the U.S., as well as France.

LyrArc Article Gist
President Obama's nationally televised speech on Sept. 10, 2013 about the need to keep the military option for strikes in Syria alive, and an acknowledgement of the war weariness of the U.S. after two wars in the Middle East and South Asia.