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.


Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Ishaan Tharoor provides a brief history of Russia's intervention in Syria and its role in the Middle East since 1950. This does not mention the Dulles period under Eisenhower in U.S. politics when the U.S. engaged in the Cold War withdrew support for building the Aswan High Dam, thinking that the Soviet Union would not come up with support. The Soviet Union under Krushchev provided $1.2 billion at 2% interest in 1958 for building the Aswan High Dam- constructed from 1960-1970- which helped increase irrigation and crops in the Nile river region and reduced the damage from droughts and floods. Soon after the dam was built it provided about 50% of Egypt's electricity. This was the high point of Soviet Union's economic engagement, latter support was defined by military arms supplies and led to the Six Day War, and the economic stagnation of the economy under Nasser's successors from the military. The Soviet Union was actively engaged in Iran with a Russian and British zone in the country in 1907, soon after the flowering of an effort to write a democratic constitution 1900-1907 for Iran with the help of British intellectuals, similar to the failed effort of the Arab Spring today. In neighboring Afghanistan the Soviet Union fought a long war under Brezhnev, contributing to the unravelling of the economic structure of the Soviet Union before the fall of the Berlin Wall. The British were primarily focussed on protecting oil interests in Iran in the period 1900-1950, yet contacts with British civil society led to the first grasp of democratic constitution and processes in Iran during this period. The American intervention funnelling arms support to the Saddam regime in Iraq in a war Iraq initiated against Iran 1980-1988, marks a low point in American intervention similiar to the Russian intervention in Iran-Iraq-Syria today. It may also define some of the problems of today because of the length of that war, the entrenching of military in the government in Iran, suspicions of the U.S., and the possible sense of a need for nuclear weapons to prevent attacks on Iran, as Pakistan has done in its conflict with India, though this is rarely brought up in discussions. The American arms support intervention, led to a series of cascading conflicts since 1980 with the invasion of Kuwait by the Saddam regime in 1990, the destruction of Shia in the marshlands of Iraq after a flawed peace agreement, and the follow up to that conflict with George Bush's invasion of Iraq on grounds of WMD development in 2003 for the 2003-2011 Second Gulf War including the Surge. The arms support of the Saddam regime in the war it initiated against Iran, was policy designed under President Reagan 1980-1988 following the hostage crisis and the Islamic revolution in Iran in 1979. The cascading crises with Iran and Iraq may not have led to this level of conflict and disruption, refugees and deaths in the Middle East, if American policymakers had heeded George Washington's advice during his presidency, that your enemy's enemy is not your friend when it comes to framing policy- for this reason Washington as president did not see it in the national interest to get involved in conflicts between Britain and France beginning in 1793, France having aided the American side against the British in the War of Independence. In the Proclamation of Neutrality, Philadelphia, April 22, 1993, he says: "Whereas it appears a state of war exists between Austria, Prussia, Sardinia, Great Britain and the United Netherlands, on the one part, and France on the other; and the duty and interest of the United States require, that they should with sincerity and good faith adopt and pursue a conduct friendly and impartial towards the belligerent powers.." And in a letter to Patrick Henry offering him the position of Secretary of State from Mount Vernon, October 9, 1795, Washington says: "My ardent desire is, and my aim has been, to comply strictly with all our engagements, foreign and domestic; but to keep the U States free from political connexions with every other Country. To see that they may be independent of all, and under the influence of none. In a word I want an American character, that the powers of Europe may be convinced we act for ourselves and not for others, this in my opinion is the only way to be respected abroad and happy at home and not by becoming the partizans of Great Britain or France, create dissensions, disturb the public tranquillity, and destroy perhaps for ever the cement which binds the Union." At a time of passionate political debate, it is time to step back and reflect on lessons that can be learned from the founding fathers about the way they tackled the important issues of their time....
Economist Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Neil MacGregor, director of the British Museum, has a fascination with Germany. He helped arrange the recent exhibition on Britain's relationship with Germany at the British Museum. He now leaves Britain to help manage another project, the Humboldt Forum in Germany.
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
WSJ committed to orthodox economic theory thinks of tariffs as tariffs such as Smoot Hawley from the 30's. This is why it is not true- It is about fentanyl flows that have led to 490,000 deaths over 12 years in the US and few in the US like to talk about it. Smoot Hawley had nothing to do with fentanyl, drugs trafficking and migrant trafficking that every nation not only has a right but a No.1 responsibility to its citizens to keep its neighborhoods and its children in neighborhoods safe. Smoot and Hawley were US Senators and US Congress was isolationist in mood. Their grasp of the world trading system was meager and they stepped in at a time when the world had economically not recovered from World War I, and the French against US General Pershing's advice had set the most punitive arrangement in Germany that crushed Germany after an armistice Pershing opposed that left the Kaiser's political structures intact. Tariffs is not DJT's idea. It is the solid experience of Deputy US Trade Representative, Robert Lighthizer under Reagan who conducted negotiations with the Japanese who stalled and stalled Lighthizer says, let negotiations drag on into endless nights, and Lighthizer and his team stood firm. The relentless Japanese relented and Lighthizer secured the agreements that ended this phase of trade relations in the 1980's. Lighthizer was Trade Representative in the DJT first term 2016-2020 and launched the negotiations with China. This is now 8 years since 2016 and 2016 itself was 35 years after Lighthizer negotiated with the Japanese. Today's US Trade Representative is Jamieson who was Deputy Trade Representative under Lighthizer in 2016. Each detail is carefully thought through to bring it to a fair conclusion in the interests of the world and the US. Information traveled slowly GM could not tell at any time how many cars were in inventory on its lots in 1920's. US lacked basic infrastructure for government that FDR and Labor Secretary added firt in New York in the 1930's and which was transferred to 50 states by 1940's. Today information is quickly at fingertips and consultation processes are built in between industry and government at all levels. A lot of information is carefully evaluated. USTR as DJT showed, the major study of USTR Office in the Rose Garden on April 2, 2025, has all trade barriers carefully analyzed in minute details for every country. And is working on this for 40 years. There isn't even a slightest  comparison between this and the Smoot Hawley crowd in the 1920's.  The goal not to beat anybody. Just to set the goal of a level playing field for world trade. That is the foundation of trade that is fair and respected, and is a win-win for all. WTO's basic foundation No. 1 principle is a level playing field. It is just that this was a kind of Marshall Plan for Asia of the US to let poor countries such as Japan war wrecked in 1950, and China colonial power wrecked by first Britain then Japan struggling and poor in 1990's, giving them some time to rebuild by ignoring unfair barriers to trade for 10-15 years 2005 for China. Barriers that never got dismantled and technology that leaked from the US 2005-2016 under the Obama administration. Smoot Hawley was not about the US Navy building its own ships and US shipyards in the 1920's. In 2025 US shipbuilding industry is stolen, this is why the words used "pillaged" "looted" were used in the Rose Garden. Little by little American private enterprise capitalism was superseded by a new form of capitalism in Japan then in China that combined state capitalism with private enterprise capitalism. This then was the threat America faced, and needed to redouble its energies and seek fair play.   ...

That Terrible Trillion

New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
What Krugman makes of the $1.089 trillion dollar U.S. deficit for fiscal year ending in Sept. 2012. He points out that the U.S. can have a stable to declining debt to GDP ratio with $400 billion debt. He cites the Clinton years (1992-2000) when the debt to GDP ratio declined from 49% to 33% with steady growth. What about the remaining $600 billion. He attributes this mostly to temporary factors which are reversible as growth picks up. Of this remaining excess deficit he says $400 billion is from lower tax payments to Treasury because of the 2008 economic crisis and the recession that followed. This includes the payroll tax cut which is also temporary to keep up consumer spending in the recession. The $150 billion is from unemployment insurance, food stamps, and other aid which is also reversed once growth picks up. He places emphasis on restoring economic growth as early as possible and reducing unemployment and using the recession for business to continue to invest in R&D, productivity, and government to preserve the social fabric, invest in education, and provide incentives for growth. S&P Nov. 8 report says the net government debt to GDP ratio is estimated to be over 80% in 2013. It will have to stabilize at current levels for S&P to preserve the U.S. credit rating, says S&P executive Chambers. The higher debt to GDP ratio in 2013 and lower growth rates expected makes the situation different from the lower debt to GDP ratios during the Clinton period. Britain, France and other major industrialized nations with political parties at either end of the political specrum have also chosen to stabilize or reduce debt to GDP ratios rather than take on the risks of them going much higher. The U.S. has the added problem of health care costs out of control with an aging population and about 17.9% of GDP going to healthcare costs in 2010 expected to increase significantly, as Medicare actuaries estimate enrollee numbers jump to 80 million in 2030 from 50 million in 2012. Democrats and Republicans have largely sidestepped this underlying problem in fiscal cliff negotiations....
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A cricket club in Cranleigh, England. A leafy suburb of Surrey, near London. It is all picture postcard like in this report by Stephen Castle and Andrew Testa of NYT. Just 52 miles southwest of London, this is the parliamentary seat of Chiddingfold represented by Jeremy Hunt who is No. 2 in Rishi Sunak's UK Tory government. Jeremy Hunt, the finance minister of UK, says he is uncertain whether he will lose the seat, "its the toughest it's ever been" as he goes door to door. A professor at the University of Manchester says Hunt's personal contacts are not much of a life raft as Tories face a tsunami of people's discontent over the promises and now visible failure of Brexit, of the decades of Tory austerity under Cameron, Boris Johnson, May and Sunak, and the failure in public services, promises for infrastructure that were never delivered. The British economy is in poor shape as the people of Britain turn to Labor party of Keir Starmer in 2024. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Mistakes French bank Societe Generale made with acquiring a controlling stake in Greek bank Geniki. Credit Agricole bank had a similiar experience with its stake in Greek bank Emporiki. In 2010 Societe Generale was forced to set aside 400 million euros for bad loans. Credit Agricole had to remove the CEO and higher executives in 2009 before introducing good loan criteria at Emporiki. Today Emporiki has loan loss provisions of 12.5% of gross loans, and Geniki has 21%, according to analysts. Dirk Hoffmann-Becking, analyst at Bernstein Research, estimates that a default that took out 30% from the value of these Greek banks loan book and 70% from Greek government bonds would result in a loss of 3 quarters of earnings for Credit Agricole and for Societe Generale 1.5 quarters of earnings. This would mean that the French banks would take 3 quarters longer to get their capital reserve ratios to 9% for new Basel III regulations.
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Hype and sales tactics by banks in sovereign bond issuance is coming under scrutiny by the International Capital Markets Association (ICMA). In one deal, a "covered bond" issued by Spain's Banco Santander SA in June 2011, with the collateral being Santander's loans to Spanish local and regional governments, this was clearly the case. The deal was managed by HSBC, Societe Generale, Commerzbank and Santander. One or more of these banks told investors they already had orders of 1.5 billion euros, which exceeded the original size of the 1 billion euro offering. After this deal found no buyers because of fears about Spain's debt situation, it became clear that the claims about orders were hype. The underwriting banks had to buy the bonds worth hundreds of millions of dollars.
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
In a closely watched election Mr. Wilders of the far Right in Netherlands gains 20 seats, far behind centre right People's Party for Freedom and Democracy of prime minister Rutte who won 33 seats. The Dutch Green party which is strongly pro- Europe went from 4 seats to 14 seats, the Christian Democratic Appeal party gained 19 seats and the pro-European Democrats 66 party also gained 19 seats. In the 150 member parliament Rutte needs 76 seats to form a new coalition government, and he is likely to ally with these other parties to form a new government that supports strongly the European Union. This editorial in the NYT says the people of the Netherlands turned out in large numbers to support pro-European Union parties. Next the focus is on France and Marie Le Pen's challenge from the far Right. Cyber threats from Russia are seen as a way to discredit otherwise strong candidates, and the French government is taking this seriously. Chancellor Merkel said she "was very happy that a high turnout led to a very pro-European result," and president Hollande said this was "a clear victory against extremism."  ...
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Jim Yardley points out the controversial nature of the referendum in Greece on July 5, 2015. It is flawed in 3 respects- it makes no mention of Europe, the details of the agreement are not clear to voters, and the "No" vote is framed in terms of the "Oxi" or "No" vote of 1940 in Greece to Mussolini for annexation of Greece. No sane minded person can confirm that this has anything to do with the annexation of Greece by foreign powers. It had one additional flaw- the government and Tsipras simply went ahead and campaigned for a "No" without talking to its European partners. Landon Thomas Jr shows how the difficult dynamic and confrontation between the eurozone negotiator Dijsselbloem and the Greece negotiator led to the collapse of talks on June 25, 2015, playing right into the paranoia of an inexperienced Greece administration about the EU's intentions. Only over a week later July 7, 2015 the new Britain trained Greece negotiator Tsakalotos from St Pauls School and Oxford was able to change the very tone of negotiations leading to the Third Bailout Program. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Areva will take a writedown of 1.46 billion euros on the value of its uranium mining business. It will take an additional writedown of 800 million euros for the nuclear business following the nuclear accident in Japan. Areva expects a 2011 full year operating loss of 1.4-1.6 billion euros. Areva's new CEO, Luc Oursel, says he plans to reduce the company's debt load. About 1.2 billion euros of assets will be put on sale. The French sovereign fund, SFI, says it will buy Areva's 26% stake in mining group Eramet. Areva faces losses on its acquisition for $2 billion of uranium mining company UraMin, which has declined in value by 80% as uranium prices dropped and uranium reserves in African mines turned out to be less than estimated. Areva's new plans show organic growth of 3-6% from 2012 to 2013, increasing to 5-8% in 2015. Areva's shares at 19.20 euros on Dec. 12, 2011, were down 45% since the Fukushima nuclear plant disaster. Britain and the Czech Republic in Europe, China and India in Asia, plan to invest in nuclear energy....
WSJ Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Even as huge losses continued at RBS bank bonuses remained high. After $15 billion in losses at RBS in 2013, banker bonuses were $960 million for the year. Banker bonuses declined from 679 million pounds in 2012 to 576 billion pounds in 2013. New CEO Ross McEwan, says "I need to keep people engaged." He announced another reorganization. He says RBS "is the least trusted company in the least trusted sector of the economy." This follows public criticism of RBS for not lending enough to small business and unfair treatment of customers. The new plan is for cost cuts to save 2.2 billion pounds by closing 16 corporate call centers and 11 offices in London. Sales and restructuring cuts are planned for 3.1 billion pounds in savings.
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Greg Ip of the WSJ provides this exceptional report offering readers remarkable clarity on what the Republican Tax Law does- its high and low points.  High Points 1. It reduces the corporate tax rate to bring it in line with other advanced industrialized countries. The corporate tax rate in Germany and Japan is 30%, in the UK it is 19%. For 5 years businesses can write off capital equipment immediately instead of depreciating over a couple of years. This could boost investment and growth. 2.  The law takes aim at deductions that led to distortions. It limits the mortgage interest deduction, and caps the deduction for state and local taxes. This removes the incentive to pay more for homes that exacerbated the housing crisis in 2008. The Alternative Minimum Tax is largely removed. The Low Points 1. The biggest drawback is that lawmakers did not properly fund the tax cuts. Of the 10 costliest tax breaks nine were not touched, including employer health insurance, retirement savings, capital gains. Only the state and local taxes deduction was reduced. And a new tax deduction  was created, a 20% tax deduction for small business (proprietors and partnerships) paying taxes on their individual tax returns. Taxes on the wealthy or value added taxes, reducing tax breaks, is how other advanced industrialized countries paid for the corporate tax cuts, but did not happen here. Additional economic growth  to generate added tax revenues is the way Republicans in Congress say this is funded. Yet this is a questionable assumption as Britain reduced the corporate tax rate to 19% without seeing a surge in economic growth, as Greg Ip pointed out in an earlier WSJ article. At best the Joint Committee on Taxation estimates $500 billion over a decade in added revenues from added growth leaving $1 trillion to be added to the deficit. The WhartonPenn Budget Model (WPBM) estimates only $140 to $367 bill from the additional economic growth resulting in added tax revenues. Under this model only 0.03 to 0.08 percent added U.S. economic growth per year is expected from the Republican Tax Cuts. Such a situation would be bad  for the U.S. as the gradual improvement in Debt to GDP ratio to 78% following the financial crisis of 2008 would be sharply reversed taking the ratio to 97% by 2027. An unsustainable trajectory which will require tax increases in a few years and hurt investment in education, health and infrastructure into the future. This is what worries many experts most on both sides of the political spectrum today about what the Republican Congress has pushed through for a legislative "victory." This is why experts believe this is not serious tax reform and will require a new effort after 2019.   ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
The New York Times Original article ›
DW.COM Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
German investor confidence has significantly recovered in August following the drop after Brexit. The German Investor Confidence Index by ZEW economic institute gained 7 points showing a level above zero that indicates optimism among 214 German institutional investors and analysts. This indicates a rise in business confidence following an earlier pessimistic outlook following Brexit vote. 

Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Prime Minister Fukuda of Japan and a hot new Japanese drama TV show "Change", that centers on a 35 year old prime minister Keita Asakura. It starts with dawn rising over the Japanese prime minister's building and in one of the episodes shows people talking excitedly about Obama 46 years, and Cameron, 41 years, politicians in the USA and Britain with comparisons to older political leaders like prime Minister Fukuda of Japan. In fairness to Fukuda, 72 years old, he has improved relations with China and hosted the Chinese President in Tokyo, but he has failed to get legislation through parliament because of the opposition parties the DJP which is also unpopular. But with the TV show having 20% of viewers in the Tokyo area including the current defence minister Ishiba, 51 years old, and the youngest cabinet minister, it shows that status quo is quite unpopular in Japan and the current politicians are quite unpopular.
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The Washington Post survey of 1200 readers on how the Republican healthcare plan of Speaker Ryan and the House of Representatives looks to them, how it affects them in their lives. Here Somasekhar of the Post gives the stories of 5 Americans. Some see the prospect of losing their insurance under the Republican plan even as they reach an older age, others a smaller segment says the Post, whose premiums jumped under the Affordable Care Act say they faced high premiums and high deductibles. The Post says the large majority of opinions have expressed anxiety over the proposed Republican Ryan House plan for healthcare. One of them is an uninsured poor farmer, Mr. Woosley,  income about $18000 who gained benefit from expanded Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act,  one Mr. Smith, 32 years, a personal injury attorney who faces paying $10,000 if he did not take insurance and $10,000 if he took insurance because of high premiums so a wash either way deciding to do without it, one a tech worker Mrs. Powers, 62 years, income $22,000 on year and $4000 the next, from middle class during the tech boom but facing fewer opportunities and uncertain income from part time work, hit by the deep recession facing fewer opportunities as she gets older and now the prospect of losing insurance without government subsidies, one who is from the middle class who sees little benefit from the Affordable Care Act and is forgoing insurance because of the high premiums yet faces a penalty for not being insured under the ACA, another Mr. Blanchard, 52 years, is from the middle class, a computer programmer who lost his job in downsizing, earns $100,000 as a consultant self-employed, pays $767 in premium a month and relies on the Affordable Care Act which helps him gain freedom from working at a company that could downsize,  another is a middle class programmer Mr Riffle,age 44, and his wife, who does not qualify for a subsidy with a $71,000 family salary from working 4 jobs between himself and his wife- this person finds it too expensive for his salary to buy insurance $900 a month and $14,000 deductible under the Affordable Care Act. His views are worth listening to as they go to the crux of the problem- he says he may not be any better with the Republican plan. He sees the real problem as the high cost of health care in the U.S. and the only way this can be fixed is for members of Congress to be asked to use the insurance exchanges they create. If this sample is representative it shows that there are real problems with both the Affordable Care Act and the Republican plan, that the high cost of health care the problem lurking behind every plan that does not squarely address this, and till that happens and members of Congress experience what ordinary people face, this problem can never by fully solved.   Woosley, Smith, Powers, Blanchard, Riffle, and their personal experience is at the crux of what is right and wrong  with the Affordable Care Act, and also with the new Republican plan of Speaker Ryan and the House of Representatives. For every Woosley, Powers and Blanchard who benefit, there is a Smith and a Riffle who are indifferent or are affected by the high cost under Affordable Care Act and the current system of medical care with its high cost. The Affordable Care Act does not  tackle high cost, for that to happen the culture in America that makes it possible and acceptable to charge high prices must change. Another problem apart from bringing health care costs is that any solution needs to have the whole country behind it. If the notion that all people are entitled to basic health care is to stand, the whole country needs to believe it as they do in countries like France, Britain, Germany and Japan. If this has to be made a workable proposition health care has to be offered at a price that makes this possible to achieve, and that idea also needs the deep and broad sense of support from the culture in America similar to that in these other countries. Until that happens politicians in America will get elected and turned out of office in turns on issues such as health care, based on which side they take and which problems they choose not to face squarely and responsibly. ...
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Martin Caparros describes the deadlock in Spain with no two parties on the right Ciudadanos and Partido Popular, and on the left, Podemos and the Socialist party, able to have enough seats i parliament to form a government. An agreement between Ciudadanos and Partido Popular of prime minister Mariano Rajoy, has brought the 2 parties close to 170, 6 short of a majority in the 350 member parliament. New elections will have to be held for the third time in December 2016 as a result of this impasse. The two main parties in Spain the Partido Popular and the Socialist party, alternated in forming a government during the period since the restoration of democrati government after Franco's dictatorship. Following the deep recession in Spain since 2012 two new parties have been formed Podemos on the left, and Ciudadanos a centre right party. Both parties are critical of corruption, and the cuts in spending for education and healthcare following the financial crisis in Spain and bailouts by the European Union. Caparros describes the cynicism that voters express about not just the two main parties, but also for Podemos and Ciudadanos, as voters voice their rejection of politicians and parties on the left and the right. A similiar process is taking place in other countries, in Britain most recently with Brexit and the departure of prime minister Cameron. In the U.S. with the Sanders and Trump movements, and the Beppe Grillo movement in Italy.  ...
ZEIT ONLINE Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This response by experts on transatlantic relations rejects the other view expressed in Zeit Online that the U.S. under Trump remains estranged from Germany and the EU. These experts from the American Institute for German Contemporary Studies, American German Council, and Centers at John Hopkins and Georgetown for German Studies, reject the view that the Trump administration and Germany are that far apart on many issues as it appears from media coverage.  Foremost it points out that civil society relations are sound and growing. About 50 million Americans trace their descent to Germany, including president Trump, much larger to over half the U.S. population considering European descent. Much larger is the sense of a culturally shared future with the European Union, with the nations of Europe including Germany, France, Italy, Spain, the nations of Eastern Europe, and Britain. The civil society relationships run deep in a way that is hardly affected by the Trump administration. Within the Trump administration the policies to Europe these experts remind the reader, are determined by the "adults" in the administration, who are senior members of the administration. This is a crucial point as Trump administration policy is not determined by the president's liking for tweets as much as by senior cabinet members Tillerson at the State Department, Gen. Mattis at Defense, Kelly at the White House, and senior members of Congress including Senators Corker and other senior committee members. This is why Republican Senator Kay Hutchinson was chosen as Ambassador to NATO. It should be noted in this context of German-EU relations in president Trump's first year that there was a period of German disillusionment with president Obama, exacerbated by the NSA spying on German chancellor Merkel and on the EU delegation to the UN, with president Obama's failure to offer any apology. Relations recovered from that low point. No one suggested that there be a German led decoupling of the EU with America at that low point, or at another low point in German-U.S. relations with the setup of American Pershing II nuclear missiles on German soil under the Reagan administration when there were large scale protests.  The American view that the U.S. should not have to shoulder major responsibilities for defense and foreign relations by itself is not new say these experts, and goes back to earlier administrations before Trump.  The experts argue for an active role by Germany with its partners in Europe for defense and foreign relations, which should not be seen as a result of U.S. pressure, only responding to the situation as it has evolved upto this time. Views on immigration are also changing with effort by the EU and Germany, France, to reduce immigration from the source countries in Africa, and the changing perceptions about uncontrolled immigration in Germany and France, say the authors. A coordinated policy towards Russia  is seen as not having changed. And much as a reset in relations was advocated by Obama in the first year of his first term, the current policy of the Trump administration to work with Russia to lower tensions can be seen in the same way say these experts, and not as a fundamental shift in American policy. The deep relationship of Germany and the EU with China is another positive aspect that will also help the U.S. in framing its own policies towards China. The German-American relationship, and the European Union relationship with the U.S.  is seen as basic to the values and interests of the U.S. and Europe. This relationship is too deep and supported by civil society and Congress, the Republican Party, and the Democratic Party, by large trade relationships, to be affected by temporary differences under any one administration. Even these differences are part of a larger debate that is part of dialogue on issues in a democratic society, sometimes raucous and loud, and could be welcomed and carefully channelled in constructive ways.     ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
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       ...
New York Times Original article ›

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