LyrArc Article Gist
The down to earth candour of Hawkeye Pierce of the TV show MASH on an American medical unit in the Korean war is back in the movie "Marraige Story." Alan Alda returns as a principled lawyer in a story about a marraige divorce. The 83 year old actor lets his Parkinson's disease with tremor in the hands show. In real life Alda discovered he had Parkinson's at 83. Alan is also active, very active. He is a psychiatrist in the Showtime series "Ray Donovan." He also teaches at the Alan Alda Center for Communicating Science. 

Recently we profiled Mr. Goodenough, a Nobel prize winning scientist who is active in his lab at a New York university 92 years making another effort to rediscover principles behind lithium ion batteries.

LyrArc Article Gist
Noonan of the WSJ says it is important that cooler heads prevail in the Korean missile crisis. She says it is important that cool and calm voices prevail for the U.S.- the voices of the generals surrounding president Trump- McMaster, Kelly and Mattis. The statements by president Trump are seen as reckless. Any comparison to the Cuban missile crisis with rational players on both sides is refuted by Noonan. Krushchev and Kennedy cannot be compared to Trump and Kim Jong-Un. The U.S. had conversations with Ambassador Dobrynin and Foreign Minister Gromyko of the Soviet Union at the time, the U.S. has no contacts with the North Korean government. The situation is vastly different and as retired Gen. James Thurman, head of U.S. forces in South Korea 2011-2013, points out in a NYT report, the dangers of miscalculation are high.

LyrArc Article Gist
Mike Spence, follows a popular Governor Mitch Daniels of Indiana. On social issues Spence has stood up for legislation that is socially conservative and representing Middle America. On many of the economic and other important issues Mitch Daniels had already set out and achieved much of the Republican agenda in Indiana. Spence is the son of a gas station manager who went to Hanover College, and won a seat in Congress after several tries including the first one in 1988. He hosted the Mike Spence Show on radio reaching out to conservatives after failing in campaigns in 1988 and 1990. The show ran from 1993 to 1999. In 2000 he won a race for Congress followed by a run for Governor. In 2015 he signed a religious freedom law after making some changes to accomodate critics.

LyrArc Article Gist
The BBC's Soutik Biswas takes a look at prime minister Modi as he seeks a second term in India's general election in May 2019.  Modi's first term is marked by exceptional development schemes, efforts to provide health insurance to 500 million people who cannot afford health insurance, bringing cooking gas cylinders to hundreds of millions of Indian women especially in rural areas, efforts to jumpstart building of infrastructure projects such as airports and metro subways. A new law for GST brings together the country with one tax instead of a hodge podge of state taxes for interstate commerce, something India needed for a long time but different governments failed to implement. A failed effort to fight corruption by removing from circulation large denomination currency notes reduced economic growth briefly during the first term, though it may have accelerated the shift to formal economy needed in the long run to improve tax revenues for development needs. One of the problems for the Modi government is how do you put a value on something like Swach Bharat Mission, the achievement of the goal of defecation free India in 2019 by 100% on the 150th anniversary of the birth of Mahatma Gandhi, getting rural toilets up from 38% to 100%. Development had to start from the bottom up. Similarly in a country where middle men took up a lot of the transfer to poor families of government assistance- the delivery to hundreds of millions their own bank accounts.- how do you put a value on something like this, but it is essential for development from the ground up. More than missiles or other talk this has got to be the spirit of any development oriented administration in India. Ground up, big goals and rapid delivery and an apology for the difficulties that the people suffered earlier for lack of this infrastructure. For both China and India it is the same - moving quickly to make up for 100 years of colonial rule and stagnation. The Modi government has responded to rural farmer distress with support for guaranteed crop prices. As more young voters vote for the first time an important factor is how the new voters see the years ahead under either a government led by the BJP or by a patchwork of parties as the previous ruling Congress party depends on alliances with other parties with conflicting agendas or lack of rapid development agendas. The Modi government sees itself as setting the stage for the next phase of development that would change the economy through new infrastructure development and create jobs in construction and engineering, and other areas. The criticism is that not enough jobs were created in the first term. Yet bold infrastructure development targets such as transformed the Chinese economy could be the answer for job creation. The question then is who is better qualified to launch that effort based on its track record. The Congress party's main criticism is that it has to make alliances with parties that could stall development with conflicting agendas. The other is that in the the 2 years leading to the election of Mr. Modi the Congress led government of Manmohan Singh was stalled due to corruption charges, leading to a lack of decisionmaking at the highest levels, and stalled efforts for the rapid development that could deliver the kind of jobs India needs.  Young Indians would like to see growth first and foremost, only something rivalling China's transformation over 2 decades can do this. It should be kept in mind that China poured more concrete in the 21st century so far than all the concrete the United States poured in the 20th century, according to The Guardian report. The question then is who is best qualified and in a position to deliver this needed economic miracle.    ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Madras High Court decides that it has no jurisdiction over whether Indian patent law violates WTO guidelines on intellectual property. Novartis had asked the Madras High Court to clarify this point. Indian patent law (2005 patent legislation) states that a drug qualifies for a patent only if it is a new invention or a significant improvement, not a new version of a drug from before 1995. The court upheld this. Novartis's modified version of Gleevec, a leukemia drug, was denied a patent by a Indian court. Was it right in doing so? The Madras High Court affirmed this decision, and it will not be appealed to the Supreme Court.

LyrArc Article Gist
Ford shows originality at the March New York Auto Show by showing a crashed Taurus which was intentionally crashed into a barrier at 35 mph for this display. It has amonitor which shows how the crash happened and how the electonics work to protect the occupants in a crash. Ford learned from its bland ads of taurus as the safest car in America which did not boost sales as Taurus sales dropped 13% so far this year. VW had an ad of the Jetta in a crash but nothing this original has been tried. For Ford it helps draw the attention of car buyers who have defected to foreign makes.

LyrArc Article Gist
XI Jinping tells China's National People's Congress that "western nations- including the US- have implemented all round containment, encirclement and suppression against us, bringing unprecedentedly severe challenges to development." Addressing the private sector Chamber of Commerce representatives which create significant number of jobs in China he said the Communist Party "has always regarded private enterprises and private entrepreneurs as our own people, and will always support them whenever they run into difficulties." Job creation in China is a challenge with high youth unemployment estimated at about 20%. The pandemic worsened the situation for state finances and for unemployment for migrants, the construction slowdown has added to this. The burden of trillions of dollars of local government debt increased during the pandemic with the central government lacking the resources to help, creating problems in the local economies.  This WSJ report says Xi's speech seeks to present his government's performance in the light of these challenges and future challenges as growth slows in China. The trading relationship with US-EU added to employment and income problems for China's economy and people, yet it had one weakness an over concentration in manufacturing in one country that European and US business placed in one country. The building of a  new supply chain that creates manufacturing in other countries to reduce this concentration, and the limits placed on access to western technologies by China to protect US-EU in competition, places new development challenges for China, which Xi alludes to. In the past China was able to use huge stimulus to tackle its debt by creating more growth that supported this debt creation. The pandemic may finally have reversed this as trillions of dollars of debt have built up, and construction of homes and infrastructure has reached a saturation point. This is the kind of situation that Japan entered in the 1990's after three decades of torrid growth and development rates. History is being repeated as China like Japan is entering a new phase of an aging society. In this sense the challenges China is facing are very different from that of Russia. Creating jobs is a perennial problem in India and China with their large populations and rising aspirations of people after centuries of underdevelopment, something that Europe including Russia does not face in anywhere to a similar degree. in this sense there is more in common between the EU and Russia even when they are in a war, than Russia and China, and China has more in common with India. The struggle in Europe as Cambridge historian Brendan Simms has pointed out in his History of Europe, is more about the balance of power which is the story of European history since the 1450's where no one country has been allowed to act with impunity in invading its neighbors and other countries formed a concerted group to prevent this. Be it France, Austria, Britain or Russia that acted seemingly with impunity. China has little to do with it or Europe's history. President Biden is right to say that the US only competes with China in the economic and business fields, and seeks to find common ground on climate change and food insecurity. The US has supported China throughout the twentieth century since the time of Woodrow Wilson in 1913, around the period when Tsinghua University was established with US help. The US helped China during the Japanese invasion and the Cold War period ended with renewed relations.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This report on Danish wind energy company Orsted, looks at the journey of the largest developer of wind energy in the world from a company sending natural gas from North Sea to Europe to a joint developer with Denmark's Vestas of offshore wind farms. Last year Orsted, pronounced Ehrr-sted in Danish for the O and named after a Danish scientist, decided to invest $57 billion in offshore wind farms by 2027. It was not easy and the path required a bold vision and bold action to invest in wind energy for the long term even as debt piled up from losses in natural gas competing with coal, climate change committments were not yet strong, subsidies were required to make wind energy competitive, and debt was piling up. It would take a decade of hard work and technological innovation to produce wind energy that could outcompete coal and natural gas on cost without subsidies. The year is 2009 with the Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen. The predecessor company to Orsted was losing money in natural gas with lower cost coal energy generation in Europe at the time. Yet the mood was changing governments were willing to invest in renewables. In 2012 a new CEO Paulsen did a review of 12 businesses of this Danish energy company and decided wind energy was the only one with long term prospects. The Copenhagen Climate Change Conference created new awareness for the need to come up with a long term solution for energy that has no negative health effects and is renewable. That Conference set a goal of 20% for renewable energy by 2020 in the total mix for Europe up from 14%. Paulsen saw an opportunity in the crisis at the company then called Danish Oil and Natural Gas. The new company was called Orsted and the old divisions in fossil energy were sold to invest in wind farms offshore. The way Paulsen saw the situation was that the company had to take radical action whether it wanted to do so or not. By 2012 Danish pension funds were investing in large offshore wind farms of Orsted, taking a stake of as much as 50% in the Nysted wind farm. The Danish government which owned 80% of Orsted thought its projects were risky. Hard work with Vestas which builds the turbines in Denmark paid off in developing a huge new turbine that would bring costs down 65% comparing 2020 with 2012.  In 2018 the European Union was spending about 92 billion euros or $112 billion on energy subsidies including to wind farms. Britain also heavily subsidized offshore wind farms such as Hornsea 1 at about $198 a megawatt hour for 15 years double the electricity price in recent years. Windy conditions and shallow waters in the North Sea were favorable. Technology was being developed with Vestas which would reduce the cost each year. By 2016 Orsted was listed in Copenhagen. The remaining oil and gas business was then sold for $1 billion. The returns are less in wind than coal and natural gas- about 7-8% a year but the big thing is that there is certainty in this compared to coal and natural gas which are volatile and uncertain. The lesson companies are learning in renewables is that with solar and wind technology can. bring down costs, a lot of hard work and creative work lies ahead, that crisis can be turned into opportunity for companies that can be focussed enough to produce results. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Healthcare, climate change, pensions and social benefits, are three issues uppermost in the minds of German voters. Three million new young voters most of them only about 2 years old when Merkel started 16 years in office, look for change. They are well informed and for these young voters climate change is the most important issue. DW.com shows three voters and how they plan to vote. One voter has cast a mail in ballot for The Greens party. The second voter will vote for the Greens. Both because of climate change concerns. The third voter Thurid says her mother is a geriatric nurse and is not vaccinated. She is vaccinated but had talks with her mother and understands her worries about vaccination. She will vote for the Free Democrats because they oppose compulsory vaccination. The three leading parties for young voters are the Greens party, the Free Democrats, followed by the Social Democrats all in the range of 16-18% of support. The Greens have sent out 2 million brochures to voters. Out of 60 million voters in a German population of 80  million, 3 million is only 5% of the vote. What makes a difference is that it is consistent with the general direction of voters young and old, all looking for change in Germany as the CDU party attracts only about 20% or one fifth of German voters. Social Democrats Scholz is way ahead of Christian Democrats Laschet in how voters view each candidate. Will German voters be well informed enough to make a decision based on their desire for change after 16 years of Merkel or will the CDU bringing back in the last days of the campaign the old fears that the communist Left party would somehow find its way into the government using the Greens as a way in- this is a question for German voters. In1994 during the Cold War with Soviets Kohl used this to keep the Social Democrats out and Greens out and formed a coalition with the FDP. Yet today Merkel has grown close to both Russia and China and away from the Western alliance in a way that was unimaginable under Adenauer who helped build the new Federal Republic of Germany after the war. Merkel refuses to even immediately accept a call from a new US president Biden, American president who is closest in style and temperament to Harry Truman who faced off the Soviets in Berlin in 1948.  The FDP opposes a wealth tax or any form of taxes in which the wealthier pay a fair share of what is needed to build crumbling infrastructure in Germany neglected in the Merkel years. In Germany social and economic disparities have grown during the pandemic with poverty increasing during the pandemic as has happened throughout Europe and the world. The US is already committing to increase taxes for the upper incomes. This is where voters have a choice- do nothing with infrastructure, health or climate change or do something by increasing taxes. The choice is now before the German people.  With this question comes a choice for western civilization, with the recent election in the US, and two elections in Germany and then France. Will it look with optimism to the future or will it huddle up in a deeply cautious and slightly pessimistic view of the world that is embedded in Angela Merkel's cautious vision that ended up only responding to crises- some self inflicted as in migration policy, and even self inflicted in tackling euro problems created in the euro currency's faulty design. In fiscal policy as in migration policy Merkel has reversed her position- by supporting European solidarity. Will Germans vote for optimism or never ending caution? Are lessons learned?     ...

LyrArc Article Gist
During a public dialogue during the federal government's open day German Chancellor Scholz takes time to go over the origins of the war in Europe as he understands it. Of Russia acting "clearly with the intention of conquering its neighboring country," in an imperialist manner. Here is what he said- On Nato During talks before the war started in February when he met Putin in Moscow Scholz assured Putin that Ukraine would not join NATO "in the next 30 years." NATO was never a threat to Russia even though Putin says NATO's increasing eastward expansion was to the detriment of Russia's interests. On the origins of the war in Europe- Scholz says Putin launched the war for "completely absurd reasons." During his talks with Putin for example he says Putin told him that Belarus and Ukraine should not be independent states. "This is a war that Putin, Russia, started, clearly with the intention of conquering its neighboring country. I think that was the original goal." "Putin actually had the idea of swiping a felt-tip pen across the European landscape and then saying, 'This is mine and this is yours.' " Something Germany could not accept. Scholz condemns Putin's imperialism. He compares Russia's actions to the early days of imperialism. Scholz was reported to be reading Cambridge historian Brendan Simms book Europe- The Struggle for Supremacy in Europe from 1453 to the Present, before the war started. Simms shows a Europe that fought intermittent wars for supremacy between European powers Spain, Britain, Dutch, French, Germany, Austria- Hungary, Russia, Sweden over most of the period 1450 to 1950. The last part of the period was marked from 1850 to 1900 by an openly imperialist land grab for territory in Africa and Asia between Britain, France, Japan and Germany.  The period 1950 to 2000 marked by the Cold War between the US and the Soviet Union and China.    On planning for the war in advance- DW.com reports that Olaf Scholz is convinced that Putin planned this war long before the Russian invasion of Ukraine on Feb. 24. On the future of the war- Scholz says he will not end the dialogue with Putin. Scholz and Germany, Biden and the US want to show that the imperialist type of expansion into neighboring states is no longer accepted, not for Russia or China. Scholz says Russia is currently engaged in gaining territory in eastern Ukraine, but it is not certain that it will stay that way, so giving in is not a sensible strategy.  Ukraine needs the Black Sea ports and the area around Kherson on the Dnieper river to maintain its economy through exports of foodgrains. There is international consensus that these exports are essential to most of Africa and other parts of the world. The war in the remaining part of 2022 into the winter is being fought in this area. Another area of international consensus is that of the refugees mostly women and children in other parts of eastern Europe, and the displaced people within Ukraine moving from the east and south to the west. For the first time the US and Germany are providing Ukraine with the air defense systems that it needs to protect refugees, something that was missing for the many early months of the war leading to millions of refugees inside and outside Ukraine.       ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Sri Lankan High Commissioner Milinda Moragoda, is interviewed in Indian Express in Idea Exchange, with Shubhajit Roy, moderating the questions. Moragoda explains what happened over the last three decades and how Sri Lanka got to this point. About politicians he says Sri Lanka has too many politicians, and the violence of the JVP in the south and LTTE in the north and northeast set the country back by decades. Leaders from J Jayawardene, Kumaratunga to the Rajapaksas all failed to understand the spiral downwards of the economy, says Moragoda. Debt increased and 80% of the government revenues goes to pay pensions and government employees, leaving only 20% for debt service and little for investment in the economy. He says there are 1.5 million government employees and 500,000 pensioners, for a country of 22 million people. Of the population of 22 million about one million Tamils left the country during the civil war, and another 1 million people are in West Asia. Moragoda says most of the borrowing came after 2009 as the civil war ended with $12.5 billion borrowed or 40% of the total debt. About 80% of government revenues goes to pay pensions and government employees and another 70% goes to pay interest on debt, but he does not elaborate or explain this. What one can say from the experience of other countries in debt spiral is that at some point the interest accumulates to create a vicious cycle of interest on the cumulative total which includes interest from earlier years. Argentina is a recent example. And he makes no effort to say how he sees Sri Lanka is finding a path out this situation with a $2.9 billion IMF loan on debt of $51 billion.  Of the $12.5 billion borrowed since 2009 Moragoda says "that's  40% of our debt." Yet the total debt on which Sri Lanka defaulted is shown at $51 billion. $12.5 billion is 25% of the $51 billion. He does not provide any details about the financing terms on which Sri Lanka borrowed. It is clear that the interest rates were high over 6% in many cases which can be very burdensome for poor countries dependent on commodity exports. Countries such as Greece with debt crises had very large numbers of pensioners and government employees in Europe during the eurozone crisis, but nowhere does it show that it took up 80% of the government revenues in Greece. The number of government employees range from 1 to 1.2 to 1.5 million according to different figures for Sri Lanka. Even in Greece the number of public sector workers in government were 616,000 by some estimates during the severe eurozone debt crisis years around 2015. They are now estimated at about 369,000 in 2020.  Without a clear idea of these figures and transparency it is hard for any economy to be managed in a prudent way. See the related report "Fallacies of Sri Lankan Debt Patterns," a report by the Observer Research Foundation, on this same page today which say that Sri Lanka borrowed at exorbitant interest rates for a poor country.  Moragoda has worked for administrations in different portfolios including in economic affairs. He says Sri Lanka's economy is too small to get attention and investment it needs from India, and that the Adani investment shows that this can still be made to happen. India remains Sri Lanka's key partner as it grapples with this crisis. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Saudis are now prepared to increase oil production after weeks of US diplomacy in exchange for security guarantees against attacks by Yemeni rebels and Iran. Russian oil output has declined by about 1 million barrels a day since the start of the war says WSJ. Drops in production lead to a rise in oil prices more than making up for the decline in revenues for Russia. This makes oil sanctions a weak deterrent for Russia in its invasion of Ukraine unless Saudis and UAE step in with increased oil production to make the EU embargo on Russian oil work effectively to cut Russian oil revenues financing the Ukraine invasion. Europe has stepped up with its embargo on about 90% of Russian oil- all except pipeline supplies to Hungary and Czech Republic, Slovakia as an exception. This will reduce oil production in Russia as EU is the biggest importer of Russian oil, bigger after previous German chancellor Merkel's failure to see the risks in such dependence and increased imports. For the oil embargo to lead to sharp reduction in Russian oil revenues that reduces financing of the Ukraine invasion, and for the EU oil embargo to bring results the missing piece is Saudi action to increase production. This may now be in place as Mr. Biden visits Riyadh next month. Crown Prince Salman of Saudi Arabia has pushed Saudi Arabia to make changes to modernize the country's culture providing the US with a partner that is now different than the Saudi Arabia steeped in tradition and inward looking under previous rulers. Under president Obama Democrats favored Iran and reduced security guarantees that were set up since president Franklin Delano Roosevelt met the Saudi King in 1944 aboard an American ship during the war. The turn of events with Russian invasion of Ukraine with Chinese support have created risks of a China invasion of Taiwan with aggressive action of China. President Biden has made this clear and stated straightforwardly the American position on Ukraine- Russia winning by invading a neighboring country sets the precedent for a Chinese invasion of Taiwan. This is why the US remains resolute with its European partners in seeing to it that Ukraine remains as Biden said in the NYT  "independent, sovereign and able to deter invasion and defend itself." For Europe it is about defending its neighborhood from the Baltic Sea to Bulgaria in the Balkans with American support. For the US it is about keeping its leadership presence in Asia in an alliance with Japan, India, Australia and most of South East Asia including Indonesia, Bangladesh with a population of close to 3 billion people. China which was supported by the US throughout the period of colonial dominance since the 18th century preventing its breakup and foreign rule as happened in India, and a major recipient of American aid and investment in the 20th century is now where Japan stood in the two decade period 1925 -1945 with its aggressive expansion under Japanese imperialist rule. In this sense the world is moving back to the days of the Free World's struggle in the days after the Iron Curtain fell over Europe with Soviet expansion in Eastern Europe. Saudis, UAE, and Turkey as part of NATO, are also moving back to the positions they had over a long period for centuries from 1800. Saudi Arabia and UAE came into prominence after discovery of oil and were backwaters to Egypt and Turkey which were supported by Britain to keep Russia from advancing in Asia and Europe during that period. India under the British Empire is now in the Indo-Pacific Framework with Japan which was inward looking and under European influence for most of the last 200 years.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Lulu Garcia-Navarro interviews Homeland Security head Alejandro Mayorkas and asks him direct questions about the border with Mexico, published Feb 2, 2024 in NYT. Why the surge in migrants asks Navarro. Mayorkas is himself a Cuban born immigrant. Republicans in the House are impeaching Mayorkas. Navarro asks can you clearly say what has gotten us to this place and what went wrong? Clearly something had happened in Latin America. Central America drove migrants north after conflicts in Salvador, in Nicaragua and drought affecting Guatemala's agriculture for over 2 decades under different administrations. Mayorkas says in response to the question that the world is experiencing the largest level of human displacement that it has seen since World War II. He says the entire hemisphere is experiencing the enormous displacement in Venezuela as its economy collapsed. During the nineteenth century after president Monroe put forward the Monroe Doctrine that created a uniquely American sphere that asked European powers to stay away from the Americas north and south, any attempt by European powers was seen as an hostile act. It was American opposition to European colonialism. By the time of the Eisenhower and Kennedy administrations this policy was not followed with the intervention of the Soviet Union in Cuba leading to a a wave of refugees from Cuba in the sixties. In the last decade the situation in Venezuela has worsened to the point that 8 million people have left Venezuela for neighboring nations, 2 million to Colombia alone, destabilizing the southern hemisphere. Venezuelans many from the educated middle class form the bulk of the surge in migrants across the US border with Mexico in 2022 and 2023. The problems were actually exacerbated under the Republican administration as the Venezuelan inflation spiralled after 2016 skyrocketing into hyper inflation by 2018 leading to the flow of immigrants outward that reached 8 million. This kind of hyperinflation the worst in the history of Latin America need not have happened with better managing of the crisis at that time. Mayorkas says the problem is that America's system of asylum is broken and both parties need to fix it. This is proposed by Tillis-Graham and Lankford all Republicans in the US Senate with president Biden's support. When he joined the Department of Homeland Security in 2009 Mayorkas says, US Border Patrol chief told him the real problem was that from the moment a migrant claims asylum at the border under US law and the adjudication of that claim it takes several years. This is the root of the problem the law can be fixed with the will of enlightened persons in both parties by simply passing a new law. Immigrants from Latin America are just as likely to vote Republican as Democratic and this may be particularly true for Venezuela's middle class that left the country as the economy collapsed with policies that led to inflation not seen in this hemisphere.  The other alternative is for the US and both parties to agree to what would be today's version of the Monroe doctrine- then opposing European colonialism, now opposing the breakup from within of Democratic countries in Latin America leading to waves of migration north of the border and causing upheavals all over the western hemisphere. Much less a policy of such resolution both parties have failed to fix basic policies of asylum and parole that today are being addressed by legislation being put together by Senator Lankford of Oklahoma, Lindsay Graham of South Carolina, Senator Tillis of North Carolina, three core states that are Republican since the Civil War, with the help of the White House and Senator Schumer. Yet in the House of Representatives Speaker Mike Johnson calls it dead on arrival simply refusing to break the status quo. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Veering between reckless intervention and doing nothing has led to some of the problems the US faces even today.  Barrack Obama created the hope for Arab Spring at Cairo University in 2009, which he failed to follow up on. Ronald Reagan and his Arab envoy Donald Rumsfeld, Defense minister Weinberger, supported a reckless intervention on the Iraq side against Iran in 1980 after winning the election following the capture of hostages in the American Embassy in Iran. Reagan was reckless in such intervention not understanding what was happening in a religious sectarian and Arab Socialist ideologies war in which US interests were not involved. Le Monde of France recounts how Barrack Obama hesitated to followup on his warnings in 2011 after the Arab Spring. This led to Obama doing nothing in the face of just what he had stated at Cairo University of people "having the ability of speaking their mind and having say in how they are governed," and US intention "we will support them everywhere." Another instance of no action was with a failed state situation and  millions of refugees in Venezuela after a Bolivarist Chavez ideological economic collapse similar in some ways to Arab ideologies Iraq and Syria. US did not follow the Monroe Doctrine on non intervention of foreign European powers on the American continents. Obama's speech and then inaction may be at the root of today's problems of migration and the divisions it has caused. Millions of Syrian refugees left for Greece, Hungary and Germany in 2015-2016. It was followed by Brexit again on migration. And in 2016 migration and the Border in the US election. And again in 2022 and 2024 the Border and migration the big issue in the US election. In a speech at Cairo University in 2009 during a visit to Egypt. Obama said: "I do have an unyielding belief that all people yearn for certain things: the ability to speak your mind and have a say in how you are governed; confidence in the rule of law and the equal administration of justice; government that is transparent and doesn't steal from the people; the freedom to live as you choose. These are not just American ideas; they are human rights. And that is why we will support them everywhere." On September 11, 2012 following the death of Libyan dictator Muammar Khadafi and the beginning of civil war in Libya, the Libyan mission in Benghazi was attacked with US ambassador Christopher Stevens killed just 2 months before the US presidential election.  Faced with use of chemical weapons Obama issued a warning to Syrian regime in Damascus- then following the Libyan experience did nothing. Le Monde cites an interview with president Hollande of France in 2015 who expressed his frustration with France willing to act.  Obama underestimated the ISIS in the region says Le Monde, leading to the situation by 2015 of the eastern part of the country linked to the region around Mosul going under ISIS. By 2016 the problem of ISIS was left to next US president DJT to tackle by Obama, a result of the inaction in 2012-2013 on Syria, says Le Monde. And like Angela Merkel in Germany on migration, Barrack Obama simply rationalized his action, with the US and the EU left to tackle the results of these actions.     ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Questions may relate more to how these situations affected the role of Gates and similar individuals in protecting the interests of the US, Europe, India, Latin America and Africa in health organizations such as the World Health Organization. As globalization spread governments in the West surrendered some of the essential role they played in world health organizations to individuals and NGO's, and countries lacking experience needed for such an important task. The mishandling of the pandemic is partly a result of this retreat by western governments from the role that they have played during the nineteenth and twentieth century. In the US letter to the WHO by president Trump the role of Gro Harlem Brundtland of Norway was shown in handling an earlier virus epidemic that originated in Asia so that it would not spread and could be controlled. This is the H1N1 crisis in 2003 cited in Mr. Trump's letter to the World Health Organization. Brundtland took strong action that was missing during this pandemic after the US and western nations surrendered the essential role they have played for centuries based on role in medical science discovery for maintaining public health. Surrendering this role or seeing it erode is one of the biggest mistakes of our time and a mistaken form of globalized behaviour. It is only now being corrected as the realization dawns on major nations such as US, UK, France, Japan, Russia, India and other countries about the essential stability provided by western nations knowledge, experience and resources to this task of maintaining global health. Even a nation like India has to base its role on hundred or more years of work in medical science and commitment to public health that transcends political preferences or national interest to take on and be a worthy participant with the advanced nations that have played so great and beneficial role for the world in public health. What to speak of transient interest of nations in the developing world or countries where national interest or political preferences play a part in public health of the peoples of the world. This responsibility for world's public health can never be delegated to individuals, foundations or any one country, or small countries, or a combination of these, only to the collective experience of the last 300 years in medical science discovery and the role of Europe including Russia, and the US in leading the way.  The Biden administration has the same underlying concerns as the Trump administration about this mishandling of the pandemic and the disasters that followed bringing so much death and suffering This excerpt on Brundtland of Norway is from the letter the US sent to the World Health Organization- "In 2003, in response to the outbreak of the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) in China, Director-General Harlem Brundtland boldly declared the World Health Organization’s first emergency travel advisory in 55 years, recommending against travel to and from the disease epicenter in southern China. She also did not hesitate to criticize China for endangering global health by attempting to cover up the outbreak through its usual playbook of arresting whistleblowers and censoring media. Many lives could have been saved had you followed Dr. Brundtland’s example." ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The issues related to India's borders all hinge on Tibet says the Council on Foreign Relations. Sardar Patel and Nehru had differences of their own on whether the McMahon Line set by the British in a treaty with Tibet as an independent country was the border with Tibet or the border with China.  Between 1913 and 1950 Tibet was an independent country, with an Indian High commissioner in Lhasa between 1947 and 1950. After the Cold War set in and China and the Soviet Union fought to defend the rights of colonial peoples the U.S. and Britain did not recognize Tibet as a part of China. Nehru simply remained with the British status quo of the McMahon line as the Indian border with Tibet, without any clear acceptance  of the invasion of Tibet in 1950 by China, yet accepting the new status quo after the invasion, differing from Sardar Patel on the issue. This is why no clear picture emerges from looking at the official positions of the two countries, and a better understanding can be gained by looking at the border issue from the Council of Foreign Relations in the U.S.   Essentially the border issue is not beneficial for what it gives back to each of the two countries. China sees itself rejecting the period of its weakness during the Japanese invasion so that it reasserts its position to borders that stretch outside where Chinese people live. India sees itself rejecting the weakness during the British period and the early post British period during which India was occupied with the issues relating to partition of British India and the partition of Kashmir. This is why the Council on Foreign Relations can provide a better understanding from and independent perspective.  Both sides have little to gain. China by being at the Tibetan border puts itself in a position where it has little to gain being on the border with a large rapidly industrializing country with a population of over 1 billion.  At over 4000 metres or 20,000 feet the territory and landscape is not one that humans can adapt too in any way, except for a few military personnel doing their term of duty of 6-12 months from India or China. China is even further away from the border as it is a remote border from Beijing, Shanghai, Canton or Chengdu, thousands of kilometres when it is just 8 hours from Srinagar by highway to Leh, Ladakh, and the Nepalese border very close to the Bihar state in India. The very distance suggests remoteness, with customs traditions in the region very different from that in China, suggesting very little connection between Beijing near Mongolia and Tibet or Ladakh very close to India by road or rail. To get some idea how close the Tibet border is to India consider that Rasuwagadhi Fort border point between Nepal and Tibet is only 127 miles by road from Kathmandu. The distance by rail from the Indian border in Bihar to the Nepalese border is only 34 kilometres with a new upgraded rail connection. Being this close India is likely to upgrade infrastructure throughout the northeast region as it upgrades infrastructure, roads and bridges and rail throughout India at an accelerated pace for economic development.     ...

LyrArc Article Gist
There are differences between the governors of 10 worst hit states and the president of the U.S. on when to reopen the economy. The seven on the East Coast including New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, Massachusetts, and three on the West Coast including California and Washington, all but one have Democrat governors and want to wait beyond May 1, till it is believed to be safe to reopen.190,000 of the 592,000 infected cases and over 10,000 of 25,000 cases of deaths are from New York alone. This is as though a third of the problem is in one state. The feeling in New York is that it should be the last to reopen, other states can go first in the middle of the country. The position in the U.S. Constitution is for states to maintain public order and safety. This was the basis of the president's position to work with the governors and continues to be the case, though there is pressure from economic advisers to the president to reopen earlier balanced by the opinion of health experts around the president.  Some states are taking action to reopen because the virus has not severely affected these states. President Trump says it is for governors to decide what is best for each state in consultation with the federal government. The U.S. government would step in if a state is taking risky action with the coronavirus. On the issue of whether the president could have acted quickly in February following his decision to stop flights from China and set up quarantines in January, the BBC has this to say. Dr. Fauci, the president's respected health expert was one of many public officials who did not see the magnitude of the crisis evolving with lack of good information from China. BBC North America Editor Jon Sopel cites Dr. Fauci's comments on February 13- that the coronavirus danger is "just miniscule" compared with the "real and present danger" of flu. As it happened the president acted alone in his sense of the danger from the outbreak in China through incoming flights and not relying on others. Here is what the situation of each country on reopening is- India -  has extended the lockdown to May 3. France - has extended the lockdown till May 11. U.S. - has extended the lockdown to May 1. States are taking the responsibility. UK - continues lockdown restrictions till May. The French president Macron had a simple answer to the question " when will we be able to get back to a normal, prior life?" Macron said "Quite frankly, humbly, I have no definitive answer to that." Some nurseries and schools will reopen May 11. Not restaurants, hotels, museums and theaters. By May 11 France will be able to test and quarantine anyone with symptoms and general public masks will be available to all. This is what Dr. Fauci in the U.S. also wants to see before being able to reopen, that testing and tracing, isolating, procedures be efficient and reliable. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Prime minister Modi's visit to the US comes at a time when US president Biden is eager to show the US is fully engaged in the Indo-Pacific region with its allies in the Quad 4 countries- Australia, Japan and India. The recently announced Aukus defense agreement brought together 2 members of the Quad 4 the US and Australia, plus the UK. Aukus is designed to strengthen US presence as a naval power in the Indo-Pacific region in the Indian and Pacific oceans around India, Southeast Asia, China, and across the Pacific. After a futile engagement in Afghanistan the US is reorganizing its presence where it is strongest- in the oceans. In a way that Britain once did in the eighteenth and nineteenth century, the US is dominant in the high seas. US naval power far exceeds that of all navies in the world combined. This is meant to reassure India, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia, Philippines, Vietnam, Australia and Japan, which together have close to twice the population of China, that the US has not diminished its presence in any way from that it had in the 1950's following the Second World War. With this new framework India enters discussions that will focus on health to deal with the pandemic and its after effects, with security and rule of law in the Indo-Pacific region, with trade, technology, new supply chain manufacturing structure in which India plays a key role. With this new focus and clearing past engagements made by other US  presidents, including some mistaken policies, the US emerges as a new force in the Indian ocean, China seas and Pacific ocean region.  On September 23 Modi meets Tim Cook for what could be new supply chain arrangements that Apple could be preparing as it and other US corporations build new supply chain structures to rebuild US manufacturing technologies capabilities that were lost to China over the period 2000-2020. During that period manufacturing technology knowhow was shifted out of the US in a mistaken policy that assumed design and invention were sufficient for the US to keep. The first step in this direction was a change of CEO's at Intel Corp with US president Biden pushing for new US technology reclaiming policy. Following that the new CEO at Intel Corp, Patrick Gelsinger, completely reassessed Intel's mistaken policies of ceding its entire semiconductor manufacturing technologies capabilities to Taiwan and China. Intel made a U turn and is now investing all or most of $50 billion in the US instead of in China or Taiwan.  On September 24 Modi meets Mr Biden to discuss trade, investment, defense, and security. On the same day the leaders of Japan, Australia, Mr. Suga and Mr. Morrison join Modi and Biden for the Quad 4 talks. Indian infrastructure capabilities and Indian economic growth would be key goals to strengthen India along its land borders along Tibet occupied region and Himalayas as part of the overall effort to build a new US and allied presence in Asia.  On September 21 Modi attends a Covid Summit that will look at the way forward in the aftermath of the pandemic and ways to vaccinate the remaining unvaccinated population in the world, as well as vaccination passports.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
President Trump outlines a plan for Afghanistan that increases the U.S. troop presence from about 8500 with an addition of 4000 more troops and advisors, in addition to a counter terrorism force. To war weary public in the U.S. he says: "I share your frustration over a foreign policy that has spent too much time, energy, money- and most importantly, lives- trying to rebuild countries in our own image instead of pursuing our security interests above all other considerations." About his criticism of the war when president Obama was in office as a huge costly waste of resources Trump said: My original instinct was to pull out, and historically I like to follow my instincts... I heard that decisions are much different when you sit behind the desk at the Oval Office." After resisting the advice of his own advisers Trump decided to fire Bannon who had supported use of American private security contractors for the war in Afghanistan, and used parts of the media to question national security advisor McMaster's views on this. Gen. Mattis, completed a strategy review that showed the mistake of creating a vacuum would repeat the situation of Iraq where president Obama withdrew forces in 2011, leading to a sequence of negative events- with Russia, Iran and Islamic State moving into the vacuum, making American intervention in the war necessary, increase in terrorist incidents worldwide, and a flood of refugees into Europe. Ironically clearing the path for an outsider's bid for the White House, with Brexit in which refugee fears and uncontrolled immigration played a part, and the news of terrorism and the war in Syria-Iraq creating a sense of insecurity. A key difference in the Trump approach with Obama's approach is that "conditions on the ground, not arbitrary timetables will guide our actions from now on," in line with Trump's criticism of Obama's approach. The military in the U.S. has long maintained that the best approach would have been to insist on U.S. presence in negotiations with the Iraqi government under the sectarian prime minister Nouri Maliki. Gen. Mattis was head of Central Command under the Obama administration and must have pushed the view of the military to president Obama to no avail. Failure to do so led to the growth of Shiite militias and the alienation of Sunnis in Mosul, leading to the fall of Mosul to Islamic State thus creating the current crisis. Gen. Mattis and Lt. Gen McMaster are intimately aware of the problem and must have convinced Trump that this is what really happened, that a repeat would waste the sacrifices of American soldiers in the twin wars. Trump gave this as his reason when he said in his televised speech to the nation- essentially a criticism of Bush that he expanded the conflict too quickly, and Obama exiting too quickly to create a void. Trump call his policy "principled realism."  The roots of the crisis are in the India-Pakistan conflict. Like the conflict in South East Asia the conflict in South Asia extending from Iran to India and Pakistan, may take a generation to overcome. A rapprochement between India and Pakistan, beginning with trade and economic relations, is not only in America's interest, it also provides the basis for a realistic American withdrawal. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Hubbard and Erdbrink report on U.S. president Trump's visit to Saudi Arabia to begin a new chapter in relations with the Gulf nations and the Saudis. Under president Obama the U.S. distanced itself from the Saudis and the Gulf nations, preferring to pursue a policy of closer relations with Iran and signing the Iran nuclear deal. This included a policy of staying out of Syria to the point of turning down a decision to deploy U.S. airpower to maintain no-fly zones to protect refugees. Syrian government forces fighting rebels were supported by Iran. The new policy is dictated by the new conditions in the Middle East. The U.S. has sought since the presidency of Reagan to balance the power relations in the region. With the nuclear deal signed and Iran respecting the deal according to independent reports, the U.S. allied with Iran in the battle against Islamic State in Iraq,  a shift was needed to balance the support provided to Iran by Russia which worsened the refugee crisis in Syria. The Republican party and Mr. Trump were critical of the Obama Iran policy during the nuclear deal negotiations. The safety of Israel is also a factor as non-state actors were supported by Iran threatening Israeli security. For these reasons the shift is an effort to rebalance the relations in the region. The arms deal in its size and president Trump's statement that Iran had "fueled the fires of sectarian conflict and terror," can be seen as this rebalancing. A business aspect of the large arms deal is that it will promote job growth in the defense industry in the U.S.. Other countries including Germany have seen growth in their defense industry. This is not the best way forward for the Middle East, yet it is a way the U.S. and nations in the region are adjusting to realities- the collapse of the Arab Spring from within and without the help from outside, the sectarian conflict arising from the Shiite pushback from Iran following the Baathist and Sunni control of Iraq which collapsed with the U.S.invasion, where the majority of people are Shiite yet with a strong Sunni presence. Elections brought Shiites in power, leading to a Sunni response in the form of Islami State caliphate move into Mosul, Iraq's second largest city after Baghdad. A decade of conflict and the efforts by the Bush administration ended in failure and sectarian conflict, resulting in the U.S. policy of rebalancing in favor of Iran to negotiate the nuclear deal. In this sense the arms deal does not solve anything. A similar rebalancing under Reagan by arming one side, followed by arming the other, led to involvement with ground forces under president Bush. It only leaves the region poor after years of sanctions against Iran to the point where a NYT reporter was not sure whether it was safe to fly from Tehran to Mashad with Iran Air because of the lack of spare parts for the airline. War torn, with millions of refugees in Syria and Iraq, the region remains broken in many ways, waiting for a sensible non sectarian view to prevail in the interest of the people in the region. The election of Rouhani in Iran by 57% of the vote is only a sign that young people in the region given a chance would opt for a different course in future. The rest of Asia has moved forward and shows a path that can be followed. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The 3000 delegates at the annual China party Congress and premier Li Keqiang showed support for President Jinping as the Congress makes changes to the constitution. The constitution was amended to include a reference to Mr. Xi's political theory, that the Communist Party would lead the country as it implements socialism with Chinese characteristics, creating a new anti-corruption commission that has party oversight of all public servants. As Mr. Jinping, 64 years,  begins his second five year term, to ensure continuity and stability the clause in the constitution that limits a president to 2 five year terms was removed. Wang Chen is the Congress vice chairman and he led the anti-corruption campaign in China that firmed up popular support for Jinping in China. Wang Chen explained that the term limit changes were designed to bring presidential tenures more in line with Mr. Xi's other positions as Party chief and military commission chairman, positions with more power and no formal term limits.  The process is part of government restructuring that puts the Communist Party more in charge of decision-making.   There was some instability under the administration before Jinping and growing corruption had undermined confidence in the Party, just as China's economy was slowing, with a bubble in real estate, high debt to GDP and need to pursue a soft landing for the economy. The present effort say some delegates including the president of Haier Appliance, is an effort that stable economic policies can be pursued to ensure China's future as its society ages, and the need to complete modernization in parts of the country that have not seen the gains seen in the coastal regions. And that corruption does not undermine the party's credibility to lead this change. The huge economic problems China faces, bigger now from a public interest perspective of pensions, social security in the Chinese context for an aging society, bringing the rapid development of the coastal regions to the interior of the country, housing, the high debt to GDP ratio, and need to ensure good economic growth to provide a stable economic foundation, may have led to a sense that a stable political foundation was needed to ensure this takes place. Political stability was affected during the previous Hu Jintao administration with the Bo Xilai episode when the party unity was affected as "some  party cadres and leaders were giddy and feverish on the waves of the market economy" as Jinping put it at Central Party School in 2013. Mr. Jinping grew up amid such tensions as his father a senior party leader went out of favor first with Mao and then with Deng after the Tiananmen protests. This instability in the country that affected economic progress is part of the experience of older Chinese leaders and affected their perception of events from memories of this period. Some of the media coverage on this topic can be misleading, as it is important not to forget that China suffered for 2 centuries in the nineteenth and the twentieth century -with British invasion in the nineteenth century and Japanese invasion in the twenty first century followed by the chaos of the Cultural Revolution before finally finding a way out of poverty and backwardness in the final decade of the twentieth century and the first two decades of the twenty first century.  ...