LyrArc Article Gist
India in 2022 and looking at 2030 has great potential in the world. India's interests as a democracy are clearly aligned with the US and Europe. In the past when India was small in economic terms after emerging from the British Empire as an independent nation and out of the fire of the partition and wars in South Asia in 1962, 1965, 1971 policies of ambivalence in foreign affairs took place. At that time says Manmohan Singh, a former prime minister who negotiated for rouble -Indian rupee agreement in the 1970's and 1980's India was finding its way for its small but growing economy. This was in the context of the Nehru-Indira Gandhi policy of non-alignment of the early years after independence when India was never presented with an opportunity to make a difference in the world and was only a small part of the world economy. Today's situation is different. The US and European Union now see the need for a principle based economic order and while one may quibble about the small details, in the larger sense, history has intended for us, the US, the European Union, UK,  British Commonwealth of which we are a part, to stand together economically and politically with our shared parliamentary systems based on western- British and American- democracy and values.  Never has history presented such a huge opportunity for billions of people- to meet the aspirations across continents from North and South America, European Union, to Africa, Asia south and south east and Japan. All countries that aspire to the free societies that have evolved over hundreds of years. It is also the spirit in which Hind Swaraj was written in 1910 by Mohandas Gandhi and which was turned into reality only 37 years later under his leadership and vision for India. The non-alignment period of 2 decades was more of a intervening chapter that resulted from a sense of grievance rather than in the spirit of courage and spirited effort that Mohandas Gandhi embodied and led India with. In Manmohan Singh's direct unmistakable terms and from the vast experience he brings as a respected Indian civil servant- "India as the largest peace loving democracy stands to gain enormously from this principled trade aspiration of the western block of nations of the US and European Union. It presents a tremendous opportunity for India to become a large producing nation for the world and a global economic powerhouse. However, to capitalize on these opportunities India needs free access to these markets, an accepted and global currency to trade in and seamless trade settlements." Manmohan Singh sees millions of factories manned by hundreds of millions of people of all castes, creeds and religions of India. This is a pivotal moment of change for India and India must grasp it firmly. It is also the Mohandas Gandhi of Hind Swaraj taken to a new level from 1910 to 2050, and today's young people's aspiration for India.  ...

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.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This WSJ story shows how China started its steel industry from small beginnings when Chinese leader Deng visited a Nippon Steel plant in 1978. He made the decision to go big with Baosteel, with an investment of $6 billion, with the words- "if we do it lets do it big." This was 36 times the Chinese foreign exchange reserves at the time. From 4% of steel production, this went up and up, passing the U.S. in 1993, past Japan in 1996, and in 2018 producing three times the steel of U.S., Russia and China combined, producing 923 million metric tons of steel in 2018, or more than half of world production of steel. With steel China was able to build its automobile industry, shipbuilding, bridges, infrastructure, high speed rail network. This was done using global demand, subsidies from the government, cheap loans and tax breaks. Markets worldwide were affected by substantial excess production in China. From Baosteel the spread of the steel industry to all 23 Chinese provinces led to China accounting for 25% of world exports. By 2016 5 million workers mostly from the agrarian countryside were employed in the steel industry, helping China transform itself into an rapidly urbanizing and modern economy. It was a period when the rail network was tripled between 1975-2017, with shipping companies that ensured access to Australian coal and Brazilian iron ore. From 2011 to 2017 Chinese steel dropped global prices by 57% triggering closure of steel mills in EUrope and the U.S. About a third of trade complaints since 2001 by G20 countries against China are about steel. After entry into the WOrld Trade Organization Chinese steel exports rose to 8% of GDP from 2%. Subsidies, cheap energy, and shift of agrarian workers to cities. U.S. investigations around 2006 showed Chinese steelmakers subsidies covered 30% to 45% of the subsidized value of steel pipes exported overseas. China's steel prices were set 20-40% lower than the U.S. China responded to complaints saying it was trade protectionism. The WTO rules call for full disclosing of all subsidies. This was disclosed 5 years after joining WTO in 2001, and only for central subsidies. Local government subsidies were not disclosed till 2016- the U.S. says 15 years late. Still the Bush and Obama administrations failed to take action. In 2018 Mr. Trump seized on this as a campaign issue that resonated with American workers in manufacturing communities across the U.S. In 2018 November president Trump announced a 25% tariff on imports of Chinese steel. A six month probe by U.S. officials had already shown 40% of sales value came from subsidies for corrosion resistant steel from China. The U.S. Trade Commission imposed tariffs of its own from 39% to 241%, with the Trump tariffs of 25% coming as an additional tariff to tackle the trade surplus with China. Meanwhile in China the government is closing uncompetitive smaller steel mills and in 2016 it combined baosteel with Wuhan Steel to create a larger company, and consolidate remaining companies. Baosteel now provides the steel for CIMC to dominate the steel container business, and to make ship to shore cranes, and make the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge.  It also goes to show what can be accomplished from small beginnings for countries in the developing world from Asia to Africa and Latin America, with government and industry focussed on development and growth.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Japan's regulatory structure for the nuclear power industry is weak because of the dual role played by the regulator- Japan's Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry. It regulates the nuclear power industry, and also promotes Japanese nuclear technology in Japan and overseas. The tasks are separated in the U.S. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission supervises nuclear plants in the U.S. It is independent of the Department of Energy which does research and promotes nuclear power. An earlier effort to correct this dual role arrangement in Japan failed, when an independent Nuclear Safety Commission was created under the cabinet. This body was never given the authority to inspect companies and mandate changes. A body that supports the commission has 4000 scientists and staff. It does research in nuclear technologies, but it has ended up becoming nothing more than a think tank, in the words of a former commission deputy chairman. What makes this situation worse, is the practice of amakudari, or "descent from heaven," a practice in Japan where senior Ministry officials retire young and take up positions in the private sector at companies like Tokyo Electric Power Company. In recent years most of the retired officials have taken positions in the energy sector. In fact Japan's Bar association investigated problems after a 2007 earthquake that shutdown a TEPCO nuclear plant. It recommended an independent regulator. The Democratic Party of Japan supported this idea before taking power in 2009. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
US Supreme Court hears arguments from D. John Sauer Solicitor General of the US on DJT Tariffs Wednesday, November 5, 2025. The Supreme Court will hear about a case brought by a small wine importing company with 19 employees. The US president used the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) that allows the president to impose tariffs. The IEEPA was introduced by president Jimmy Carter in 1977. It was used during the Iran hostage crisis. It has been used for the Venezuelan regime after elections were rigged with human rights violations, on Belarus as early as 2006, and on Mexico for drug cartels. This increases the responsibilities of the Justices of the Court as these sanctions have broad support of the American people. Tariffs were imposed on China for illicit fentanyl flows and a 25% tariff was imposed on Canada and Mexico under Executive Orders 14193, 14194, and 20% on China under Executive Order 14195 in 2025 for illicit drug traffic flows across their borders into the US. Illicit flows that has taken the lives in the case of fentanyl of more young people than were killed in the Vietnam, Korean and First World Wars combined.  For the reason that the economic aspect of tariffs now overlaps with trading partners abuse of basic rights of their largest trading partner the US in the case of Canada, Mexico and China not stopping such flows, the issue before the Supreme Court is basic to the US as a Nation to protect its citizens under these Executive Orders and IEEPA- not the kind of interpretation of the law the USC does for most or almost all of its cases. In 2025 a lot of the discourse is distorted and does not reflect the way citizens of the Nation should show concern for the welfare and safety of their fellow citizens in communities around them severely hurt by the scourge of fentanyl and other opioids making their way from other countries conducted by drug trafficking gangs outside the US.  Also relevant is that the tariffs are correcting trade deficits of $1 trillion of the world with China that threaten the economic security of the US, EU, India and other countries. Larger companies are moving their supply chains out of China to reduce concentration in China, impact on inflation is slight with 3.0 % inflation in September 2025. Smaller companies such as the wine company in this lawsuit are unable to do so. Most of the smaller businesses affected can be compensated with a fund from the tariffs revenue of $500 billion in 2025-2026. In this way the goals of the US as a Nation can be achieved of reducing the supply channels concentration in China, cutting supply chain concentration in China, for fair trade with trading partners EU/Japan, and for action on fentanyl and drug trafficking. Justice Roberts and his team have a lot to think about in this effort by the Nation to correct abuses that should never been allowed to happen. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Two weeks after his election Donald Trump says the U.S. will not join the Trans Pacific Trade Agreement during his term in office. Barack Obama took seven years to negotiate the trade agreement which was opposed by trade unions, the auto industry and was unpopular in the midwestern U.S. because of the impact of trade in hollowing out the manufacturing sector. Here Frank Sieren of the DW.com points out that the agreement was not really about trade, as most of the gains of trade had already been realized according to experts. It was part of the "pivot to Asia" to maintain American dominance in the region, says Sieren. After China pulled together some Asian and European countries into its trade agreement, the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), the U.S. pushed for TPP as a counterweight to the China sponsored trade zone. China says it will try to integrate the countries in TPP into the trade zone it has sponsored. President Trump has said that the U.S. is better off negotiating agreements with each country and not getting into multilateral trade agreements. He fought the election campaign on the basis of the opposition to TPP and trade agreements that unfairly hurt American workers. This could have provided the 110,000 margin of victory in the states suffering from the hollowing out in manufacturing such as Michigan, Wisconsin, Ohio and Pennsylvania. A similar hollowing out in Ontario favored Justin Trudeau's Liberals against the Conservatives in Canada's election. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The 25% auto imports tariff goes into effect April 2nd 2025. How much will it increase prices in the US for automobiles? The average is about 10%, say some experts cited in WSJ. This includes price increases on higher priced brands such as German brands BMW's and Audis, Mercedes Benz, and VW cars made in Mexico to ship into the US. It also includes European car makers including Stellantis that make cars in Europe and Mexico to ship into the US which could lose market share to American car makers who make most of their cars in the US. Ford makes 80%, GM 60%.  Overall US international Trade Commission in 2024 looked at the 25% US tariff in a study and showed 5% increase in auto prices in the US. President Trump's call to GM and Ford asking for restraint in pricing may be coupled with the government returning some of the money in tariffs revenue pool to American or foreign manufacturers investing more to make more cars in the US including to Hyundai which announced a $21 billion investment. More such investment decisions are expected from Japanese automakers. For example Subaru has capacity for 450,000 cars in Lafayette Indiana plant and sells 650,000 cars in the US. One would expect it to increase the capacity of the plant or add a new plant in the US. The Japanese government and Japanese business will have additional incentives to invest in the US because of the US support for Japan in the Asia-Pacific, US openness to give trade benefits to Japan in the post war period, incentive to make the Republican DJT plan for tariffs to work as a united Japan-US effort. This would include restraint on pricing.  Toyota is in much better financial shape than VW and has a large market share in the US which it will work protect with pricing restraint and more US investment. Only VW and German luxury car makers BMW, Mercedes may not cooperate. Yet VW sells only 300,000 cars in the US compared to 2.3 million for Toyota. BMW and Mercedes sell luxury cars where buyers could absorb the additional luxury brand cost without impacting inflation overall. Some of VW's car sales would be absorbed by American and other automakers considering VW was losing market share and nearly exiting the US market. before this. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
WSJ report shows that on the morning of the 90 Day Pause in Tariffs announcement discussions took place with the Swiss prime minister, with Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, and watching Fox News interview of JP Morgan Chase's Jamie Dimon. Seeing the turmoil in financial markets and bond markets, US president DJT made the decision to give time to make the agreements with about 50 countries, and time for financial markets to understand the president's  policy and goals to reformulate the world trading system into one that offers a level playing field. The chart showing the Tariffs of 67% by China and US 34% imposed tariff in the Rose Garden on April 2, 2025, was say reports the result of the influence on the president of the advice of Peter Navarro.  Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent's expertise is in financial markets as a protege of Soros, Navarro's is world trade. Bessent stepped in when financial markets appeared to reflect the uncertainty and convinced the president that the 90 day pause would be the best way to implement the policy on trade. There is a vigorous debate in the administration about how to get a level playing field for trade, and get the job done without disruptions in financial markets or a recession induced by uncertainty. On April 10 as part of the effort to talk to the American people US president DJT opened up his Cabinet meeting to the media and had Bessent, Borghum, RFK Jr and Marco Rubio talk about their plans and policies. Proper implementation, gaining confidence of the people of America and financial markets, is now as important as the goals and policies in the next 90 days. Getting the trade deals with the European Union, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Britain and India would go a long way to reassure financial markets and set the right tone for the future.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The US ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach after Liberation Day- soon to be relics from the China Trade of yesterday. On April 9 US responded to China's 34% tariff with another 50% tariff of its own on China. The US tariff now stands at 104% to China's 84%. China says it won't back down and "will fight to the end." The US president DJT is now certain to restore world trade to the days before China entered the World Trade Organization and upended the world trade order leading to the deindustrialization of the US when US corporations followed Apple in 1998. With Tim  Cook in charge of Apple manufacturing in 1998 doing the first major act of outshoring the whole manufacturing base of a company to China. It was a strategy- to use the huge profits of a three punch approach- brand the product at the high end to command high price in the US through innovation and design (punch 1), followed by making using Chinese labor at low cost in China (punch 2), to generate the huge profits to create a virtuous cycle of investment from these profits to generate new cycle of growth (punch 3). What Apple gained, America's workers lost. This was sold by economists at the service of corporate narrative that it was good for America in the face of the facts showing just the reverse for 25 years 2000-2025. Soon almost the entire manufacturing base of the US was shipped out to China, or Chinese supply bases Vietnam. Japan fell in line and became a supplier to this China Manufacturing for the World. What started out as Microsoft demolishing Apple by 1998 and Apple using this 1-2-3 punch strategy turned into first a disaster for American workers, a loss of the working class leading to the loss of the middle class backbone of America, replaced by Silicon Valley and financial interests in New York City and disproportionate rewards to capital, the rural and small towns, cities across America's heartland thrown into decay and neglect.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
No less than the Editorial Board of the NYT says  Democrats have their heads in the sand when it comes to reflecting honestly about transgender -with the Cass Commission of Britain's NHS advising serious caution- and social issues. Lack of acceptance about the need for strong action on issues of trade that have hurt ordinary Americans with the destruction of manufacturing and the middle class. Some of this was done with Biden taking a stand on trade by keeping the DJT tariffs on China, and supporting US manufacturing. But this was not enough- stronger action was needed especially with strong tariffs action as the last resort needed to get Canada, Mexico and China to stop fentanyl flows to the US in 2025 and protect the middle and working class in the US in their neighborhoods.  Yet on immigration the NYT does not come flat out and say that opening up the border was the single biggest error of the Biden administration. And a failure to talk openly to the American people in a fireside chat reminiscent of FDR about Venezuela and Mexico. Part of the reason was a misconception about American power when it could be used to good purposes and has been in history. The Monroe doctrine of the 1820's asserted American right to prevent colonial powers returning to the American continent north and south. This was a good idea and helped this continent develop freely and independently. The US has a right to prevent migrant trafficking and fentanyl flows in its backyard in the American continent, including taking economic action, when it causes serious disruption leading to 7 million refugees and millions of migrants crossing borders. It also has a right to create an even playing field for trade, that not DJT alone but advisers with great experience, Robert Lighthizer, Deputy Trade Representative under Reagan- who negotiated with 1980's Japan on the same grounds as we do with China today- strongly advise the president to do.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The meeting planned between Xi and Biden is important for stable US China relations after the Trump administration angry rhetoric, the Covid pandemic, and when imbalances in the poorly managed trade relationship with the entire supply chain shifted to China with millions of its American jobs has shaken working class communities in the US. China's and Xi's views on Hong Kong and Taiwan have also affected the relations. After the Ukraine war this will be the first meeting between the two leaders, and follows a visit by German chancellor Scholz to Beijing. Under Bush America appeared to be distracted by middle east wars, under Obama and Trump America appeared weak or angry but not resolute. Under Biden America appears resolute and sure of itself. This makes a difference for US China relations. Following the Ukraine war both the US and Germany, and China, appear to have grasped the dangers of nuclear threats such as were made in recent weeks. India has also shown its serious concerns about wars for territorial gains, and the world community of nations has expressed this through the words and actions of UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres speaking for Europe, and the rest of the world.  Under Biden America seeks decent Competition with China and not conflict, and this is in the interest of both countries and of all the countries in the world. Neither China or America represent the largest share of the world's peoples, and in a world of advanced technologies other regions such as India, Europe, South East Asia and Japan, have just as great a determination and influence to seek a mutually beneficial peaceful coexistence in the interests of all the peoples of the world including the continents of Africa and Latin America. ...

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. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi will spend Tuesday night August 2 in Taipei, Taiwan. China has threatened severe consequences and Taiwanese forces are on alert. Yet with over $1 trillion in China's exports to US and EU in 2021 the response will have to take this into account as also the US and EU to redesign its supply chains. This is the first trip of a senior US official to Taiwan as Speaker Pelosi comes next to the Vice President to succeed the presidency. The US response to the Russian attack on Ukraine was made in Biden's word as a deterrent to China in its role in the Indo-Pacific region. The Pelosi trip may be a reflection of this policy that seeks to maintain the US position that Indo-Pacific is international waters, that US policy will continue as before undeterred by actions such as the Russian attack on Ukraine with the support of China. And that US will engage fully with allies in the Indo-Pacific- Indonesia, Singapore, Malaysia and Taiwan. And that is doing this with the cooperation of its allies in the region- Australia, Japan and India. US and EU imports from China are $541 and $522 billion over $1 trillion for 2022. Loss of even a significant portion of these exports from major tensions in the region would have a severe impact on Chinese economic growth. The US and EU are already engage in redesigning the supply chain and would also face problems in a transition similar to the gas rationing in Germany after cutoff of Russian supplies. The trade is too big a factor at this time. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
GM and Ford US International Trade Commission report in 2024 sees only about a 5% increase in prices for a 25% tariff in car imports into the US from EU, Japan, Canada, Mexico and China. With US production GM at 60% Ford at 80%, both companies are better positioned to shift production to the US following 25% tariff on cars imported into the US. GM also has the financial strength to invest in new auto plants in the US. Given a period of transition US companies are in a position to tap the added demand as more cars are made in the US.  Stellantis Stellantis formed from the merger of Chrysler, Fiat and Peugeot makes many of its cars overseas in Mexico and in the EU, and has considerable exposure. Toyota Toyota sales in 2024 were 2.3 million cars, with about 60% of the production in the US. Hyundai and Kia, Nissan Hyundai makes about 80% of the 840,000 cars it sells in the US in US plants. Hyundai plans to invest $21 billion in the US to make cars in the US including $5.8 billion for a steel plant in Louisiana. Other companies may follow Hyundai to Make in the USA. VW VW had plans for an expansion to make 590,000 cars. It has current  sales of about 400,000 cars in the US. Expansion at the Chattanooga plant or putting in another plant could help it make most of its cars in the US. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Europe responds with platitudes and vague references to "benefits for everyone" and "detrimental" without facing up to the facts. How many American cars do you see on the streets of Germany? in Berlin or Frankfurt?- or Japan? in Tokyo or Osaka?-or South Korea? in Seoul? And how long has this been going on - since the 1980's. Europe's answer to the Marshall Plan and Japan's and China's to post war American help for recovery, was to exclude American cars and other products. GM and Ford have pulled out of China and so has VW. China's plan is to flood the world with electric cars, and Japan's to flood the world with hybrids. For far too long America has relied on capitalism that has no state involvement. In this kind of competition with hidden subsidies and national planning at the core of industrial growth in Asia. The US government has to have state involvement in it's auto, steel, aluminium, and chip industries, not to create trade disturbances but to create an even playing field for all, and rebuild a middle class destroyed by unfair trading practices of Asian nations and the EU, including Canada and Mexico which are simply used as bases to ship to the US. Ford makes 80% of its cars in the USA and GM can make the investments in new plants to raise its production from 60% in the USA to 80%. South Korea's Hyundai and Kia are investing $21 billion to make in the USA. Toyota and Nissan, VW, BMW and Mercedes can do the same.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This Economist article looks at India-China relations and the Wuhan Summit between prime minister Modi and president Xi Jinping. It sees India's reluctance to follow a containment strategy in an historical light from the period in which India followed a non-alignment policy in the early post independence period under prime minister Nehru. During the period of the Eisenhower administration with Secretary of State John Foster Dulles India adhered to a strict nonalignment policy avoiding choosing sides in the Cold War. As a result U.S. policy tilted towards Pakistan during the Eisenhower administration. A balance was restored under president Kennedy, with Adlai Stevenson a close friend of India.  The short Sino-Indian war of 1962 led to a situation in which the U.S. backed India and improvement of relations. A semblance of non-alignment in foreign relations continued under Nehru's daughter Indira Gandhi. By 1990 with the opening of the Indian economy to foreign investment, the collapse of the Soviet Union, and the integration of China into the global economy, a new period of good bilateral relations with the U.S. and Europe was maintained. In 2017 the potential for a conflict in Doklam, Bhutan revived fears from 1962 in India. In 2018 After the U.S. administration of Donald Trump and Trade Representative Lighthizer imposed trade tariffs on China and restrictions on export of advanced technologies China pursued a policy of conciliatory relations with India. China's relations also improved with Japan and South Korea as the U.S. policy was unanticipated and seen as a significant change that would seriously affect China's economy. India's response was to pursue a policy of good relations with China and the U.S., even as the economies of the U.S. and India were drawn closer in India's pursuit of modernization.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
In a first at Davos World Economic Forum, China's president Xi Jinping uses the 2017 meeting to give a one hour long spirited defense of the world trading system, critical of U.S. president elect Trump's protectionist views without naming him. Xi pointed out that "no one will be winners in a trade war." And went on to add that restricting world trade was like "locking oneself in a dark room, keeping out wind and rain from outside but also light and air." For the first time Jinping stated that China would take the U.S. role of defending the world trading system from attack as needed. On climate change Xi defended the Paris accords, and gave China's commitment to pursue changes regardless of what the U.S. under president Trump does. This follows Chancellor Merkel of Germany's statements on the issue critical of the views of president elect Trump, and taking the lead to defend the world trading system. Xi also pointed out that many of the ills that led to voter discontent in the West were not really from the freeing up of trade but from the pursuit of excessive profit with the financial crisis of 2008.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
William Galston in the WSJ says outright for the first time in the WSJ that the years from the last term of Clinton, through the Bush, and Obama administrations were an outright failure for the American people. He documents the losses- 5.7 million job losses in 2000-2010 as Clinton opened China's entry into the World Trade Organization without any precautions taken to prevent abuse of world trading rules after the experience with Japan. Worse no help to the displaced workers which fed into the resentment of workers. Sex scandals weakened the presidency and acted as the major distraction during the last years of Bill Clinton. Over the administrations of Bush and Obama almost the entire US manufacturing base was dismantled and shipped to China. Pharmaceutical companies were allowed to charge recklessly when Bush disallowed Medicare to negotiate prices for pharmacueticals placing additional burdens on the American people. Bush started long wars in Afghanistan and Iraq that cost the US dearly in lives and resources wasted with no vital US interests at stake as in Europe. This distracted attention from problems simmering at home. Obama continued these wars preferring to focus on reelection. The migration crisis, the neglect of infrastructure worsened during this period. The Bush deregulation of banks led to the 2009 world banking crisis that led to large layoffs worsening a bad situation from outshoring and creating a class of unemployed, and shrinking household wealth and savings. The Biden administration, the first Trump administration and now the second have started the process of revival of the US. And yet Biden, DJT are relative outsiders who came to the presidency and were not favored in the established order of the 1990-2016 period. One can say about Blair, Cameron, Boris Johnson in Britain, about Clinton, Bush, Obama in the US, and Schroeder, Merkel in Germany that the leadership was mediocre and failed the people of Europe and the people of America.     ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This interview with Donald Trump by the publisher, editors and columnists of The Washington Post, Ryan Jr., Hiatt, Lane, Marcus, Diehl, Armai, Attiah, provides an exceptional insight into the views of Donald Trump on domestic and foreign policy, on his campaign for president. It is the result of an effort to get Trump to state his policies on different issues without the fuzziness in which Trump has carried out his campaign, often taking different sides of the same issue. In some situations Trump is pressed hard on his positions or controversial statements, to clarify what he has not clarified in the burst of media attention Trump received in the past 6 months, especially on television media. First some myths and realities. A recent March 19, 2016, issue of the Economist cites the Pew Trust in showing that only about 17% of eligible Republican voters voted in the primaries. A person watching television news media coverage on Fox News, CNN, or MSNBC, would get the impression that the voter turnout was tremendous- this is not confirmed by the Pew Trust survey. The Economist points out that had the other eligible voters cast their ballots and even if Trump had a share of these votes, the results might look different. With a highly fragmented vote in the Republican primaries, and about half of the vote going to candidates other than Trump, Trump's voter support would add up to about 8-9% of eligible Republican voters based on the Pew Survey results. The question here would be is this a representative sample of the U.S. or of the Republican Party. And is one likely to make false generalizations about the nature of the Republican party from such a limited sample of voter opinion. Is voter sentiment inadequately reflected, and results hopelessly skewed because of the lack of good candidates in the Republican Party, and Trump's tactical rhetoric appealing to a group of working class Americans left out in the technological progress of the last decade. In the process is the hard work of the founders of the Republic, Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Madison and the framers of the Constitution being undone by a minority of disaffected voters with legitimate grievances on distribution of economic benefits of the technological progress, trade and global manufacturing networks- with a level of divisive rhetoric and decline in levels of public debate rarely seen. These are the clarifications sought from Trump and his response. Attiah raises the question of divisive rhetoric on minorities Hispanics and Black people- Trump says he is only talking about people here illegally, that he gets support from Hispanics here legally. He turns the question to Muslims and says there is a serious problem there that means being careful about how people are being admitted into the U.S. Questions about Trump's controversial statements about a wall with Mexico are not raised. Ryan pushes hard on the question of the libel laws standard that Trump says he is going to change, asking whether this would happen if Trump thinks the reporting "is wrong" but there is no malice. Trump wants the reporting to be fair for him, that reporters call him to check if he did this or that and why, before writing stuff about him, and he sees the reporting from the Post as very bad about him. He says his lawyers would have to tell the media, that he believes he should loosen up the standards so that this kind of coverage does not continue. On ISIS Trump pulls back when asked by Diehl about statements that suggested he would send the number of troops the generals wanted on the ground- estimated at 20,000 to 30,000- saying he would find it very, very, difficult to do that. On a nuclear option for ISIS Trump says he does not favor that. Suggesting that Trump like the other candidates in the election know there are no easy ways to tackle ISIS. Trump would rely on other countries in the region for help with troops on the ground, something that president Obama also favors, with limited results. Diehl also pushes hard on NATO- Trump says hundreds of billions of dollars are going to NATO and the whole burden for defending South Korea falls on the U.S. when it is not now a rich country that it once was. Diehl corrects him by saying for the public record that its not hundreds of billions, and South Korea, Japan pay 50% of the cost for defending their region. Trump wants to see 100% for the Korean peninsula defense borne by the South Koreans and Japan. Trump seees NATO as a good concept but needing more help from Germany, Poland, Baltics. At one point the Washington Post journalists tell Trump this is a position he shares with president Obama. Trump responds to questions from Hiatt about how he would handle the situations in black communities such as Ferguson, Missouri, and Baltimore, Maryland. Trump says he feels law enforcement is important and should play a big role in preventing the destruction of property from day one. He says jobs are what hurts inner cities but offers no solution about how to get the jobs lost in the steel industry for Baltimore, black neighborhoods sitting ironically next to the John Hopkins high technology university complex. Trump brings up the response that jobs could be created if the U.S. simply did not spend money on supporting nationbuilding overseas, a policy that president Obama has supported, and which the public has favored in the U.S. As Holman Jenkins brings up in a column on March 22, 2016 in the Wall Street Journal, these policies are being pursued today, and most of these jobs are not coming back so how would Trump bring them back or do anything about it, especially when Chinese workers in China's factories are being displaced by robotics in places such as Hon Hai factories. The more one thinks about it many of things Trump is saying are already being done, and there are no new solutions Mr. Trump has for today's problems of lack of upward mobility for the middle and working class- a priority for Sanders and Clinton also, not just for Trump. As a television personality and a candidate with a understanding of voter concerns, Trump artfully voices voter concerns of working class Americans for problems that defy easy solutions. Are there risks with Trump's approach that Trump has failed to think through or grasp? Does the unpredictable behaviour Trump suggests that would get allies thinking and trade partners responding lead to unpredictable consequences? Divisive rhetoric creates additional distractions in tackling the problems of the middle class and working class Americans. Divisive rhetoric within the NATO alliance would create additional distractions in tackling the problems of defending the European Union, such as using the very show of unpredictability. Diehl pushes Trump on this question. Would trade threats to China lead to a withdrawal from the Senkaku Islands by China? Trump says he thinks this would cause the Chinese to retreat . What if the Chinese see it differently, in their relations with Japan and South Korea, with a long difficult history, not necessarily in their relations with the U.S. Would a trade war hurt the global economy, and hurt confidence in U.S. fianncial markets just when the U.S. and European economies are staging a recovery, and when the economes of China, Japan and India are in a sensitive phase? These questions could not be raised because of time constraints, but must be on the minds of the editors of the Post and the WSJ, coming from different ends of the political spectrum. How would this help tackle the problem of upward mobility for working class Americans that all the candidates in the presidential election share? ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Greg Ip points out in this WSJ analysis that the new NAFTA after negotiations and warnings from Mr. Trump to scrap NAFTA, is not very different from the old NAFTA. Mexico made concessions on auto exports and labor rights, wages. Canada made concessions for the dairy industry. Yet the combined influence of business interests, Canada's lobbying in U.S. Congress and state governments, and the restraint shown by Trump's own advisers prevailed in limiting Mr. Trump's tendencies to go for a "America first" agenda. It shows, says Ip, that there is resilience in the existing order.  It also shows what future trade negotiations with the European Union and Japan over steel and autos could look like. President Trump will continue to face resistance within from his advisers and from exporters, business, Congress, on following an exclusively "America First" agenda. President Trump will need to extol NAFTA in its current version the USMCA, U.S. Mexico Canada Agreement, to get it through the U.S. Congress in 2019.   Mexico's main concessions on autos were to agree to potential tariffs if exports exceed 2.6 million vehicles.  This keeps Mexico's status as a major auto export hub intact. Auto experts say VW and Mazda may simply pay the tariff of 2.5% for lower priced models assembled in Mexico that do not qualify for duty free entry instead of shifting production to the U.S. Current shipments from Mexico are not affected as U.S. demand is weak. Labor rights and higher wages in Mexico's auto industry are a win-win for Mexico and the U.S.. They are supported by the socialist administration of newly elected Mexican president Obrador. Canada's main concession was to expand U.S. access to Canada's protected dairy industry, with Canada already prepared to make the concession. Mr. Trump had also to consider the possibility that excluding Canada from the USMCA would have not passed Congress, and face even more resistance in a Democratic controlled Congress after 2019 elections.  The support Canada has received in Congress does not extend to China, which gets much less support in Congress, leading to higher uncertainty in the negotiations with China and possibly different outcome with the size of the trade imbalance of $1 billion a day factored in.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Negotiations between Japan and China before the APEC summit in Beijing, Nov. 2014, lead to an agreement that does not explicitly state Japan's sovereignty over the Senkaku islands, but acknowledges the current position in which the islands have remained in Japanese control since 1880. It lets both sides agree to disagree so that trade and diplomatic ties can be improved. China's economy has taken a hit from a 50% decline in Japanese foreign investment in 2014, just as the economy is slowing for other reasons. Both leaders can show the international community they have moderated their positions. Prime minister Abe also can show his foreign and domestic policies are working as his high poll ratings have declined in recent months.

LyrArc Article Gist
In this look at China's One Belt One Road Inititative, DW.com analyst Siegfried Wolf is critical of the way it was put together. It has no institutional structure, and is mostly based on bilateral not multilateral arrangement, and lacks transparency. He says its will complicate geopolitics in the region. This is already evident with Japanese foreign minister Kono calling for Japan, Australia, India and the U.S. to come up with an alternative to OBOR. Wolf says the EU has concerns about corruption, exclusion of regions inside countries such as Pakistan in economic arrangements, and seeks free trade guarantees. His biggest criticism of the Silk Road Initiative is that being based on Chinese loans it will pose a severe challenge in terms of debt buildup for weaker economies. This was already evident with the effort to convert part of about $6 billion in loans to Sri Lanka, through a $1.12 billion lease to China of the port of Hambantota. Wolf says many of the projects inside OBOR were already planned before it was setup, and now put under OBOR as part of president Jinping's initiative.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The Trump administration's early proposal for NAFTA moves away from campaign pledges to completely renegotiate the treaty, instead taking the approach of working to improve the U.S. trade position in relation to Mexico and Canada. It includes seven objectives for tougher rules for labor and the environment favored by Democrats in Congress, and it also has support from Republicans with its effort to update NAFTA for changes in technology and in other areas since the accord was signed during the Clinton administration. The area in which U.S. and Mexican business are wary is one in which the Trump administration still seeks to keep the option of imposing protective tariffs, and a border-adjusted tax to level playing field for differences in taxes, as well as other measures to protect American jobs and interests. Because any renegotiated NAFTA also has to pass both houses of Congress this proposal took into account the different constituencies and interests for this issue. Robert Lighthizer, trade representative under president Reagan is likely to become the next U.S. Trade Representative and lead negotiator. We first profiled Lighthizer in a group in Lyrarc for pointing to the need for a level playing field in trade. As early as 2010 Lighthizer argued in op-ed articles that globalization and trade practices should ensure a level playing field for the U.S., and was covered in Lyrarc. ...