LyrArc Article Gist
Limits of new tech devices without good intelligence or help and support from the local people.

LyrArc Article Gist
The IMF extends $100 billion in loans to countries that have healthy economies but need temporary help, such as S.Korea, Brazil, Mexco and Singapore. Some of these countries have borrowed heavily in other currencies and the drop in the value of their own currencies makes repayment difficult. No strings such as requirements to raise interest rates and to cut public spending are attached to this program. Under this program countries could borrow five times the amount they are normally entitled to, $25 billion in Brazil's case, without the strict conditions that normally accompany such loans. Nobel Prize winner Stiglitz was chief economist at the World Bank. He said the funds use of the words restore confidence itself could make a lot of countries nervous. That is because in the Asian and Latin American crises in the past, the IMF set strict conditions to increase interest rates and cut public spending and food subsidies at a time when the poor especially and the rest of the people, all needed help, thereby increasing public distress. In the developed countries stimulus packages and infrastructure spending goes up to support employment and incomes, but the IMF has advocated quite the reverse in the case of the developing countries, with the US Treasury a key factor in IMF support and ideology. Which is why countries in Asia like South Korea see a stigma attached to the IMF and are refusing IMF help. In Pakistan also the IMF support is a last resort or Plan C. Iceland for instance raised rates in return for IMF help from 6% to 18% to try to stabilize the currency. The IMF was created as part of the Bretton Woods agreement of 1944 when the Allied Powers USA and Britain and other countries that sent representatives met in New Hampshire for a postwar economic system. Japan, S. Korea, India and China and many other countries were not part of it because of the war or colonial empires....

LyrArc Article Gist
The India Pakistan issues have already evolved into India China issues. And the competition between the US and China has consequences for India, the European Union and the rest of the world. As the US seeks to regain its industrial base and reduce overconcentration of manufacturing in China, India is at the stage of a manufacturing effort that is similar to Japan's in the 1920's and 1970's and China's in the 1990's. It will take place over the next two decades. This is the crucial event for Asia that will see the emergence of not two but three nations in Asia- Japan, China and India as modern manufacturing nations.  The talk about military action popular in the media misrepresents the real issues which are economic and ignore the turning point in 2025 with the Ukraine war putting the European Union and Germany's position of concentration of production in China as untenable. For the US DJT represents a second effort to bring serious manufacturing back to the US and allies such as India. This will be the deciding change in Asia and the world by 2030, 2035 and 2040, as India will make the decisive change to a modern nation similar to the US and Europe. This will open up opportunities for 1.4 billion people in India and a related 300 million people in Indonesia. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Chuck Hagel on the need to bring in more countries to handle difficult situations such as the one the US faces in Iraq and Afghanistan. He says thats why the world now has a G20 and not a G8. No country can face these situations alone especially when there is a mutual interest of many countries in these situations. He calls it a 20th century reaction to 21st century realities. He says the 2 wars cost more than a trillion dollars. One sees a new respect for international institutions such as the UN, World Bank, IMF, and GATT renamed WTO, even with Republicans. Chuck Hagel's point makes a lot of sense and is generally accepted in people's understanding of the situation from the Defence Department to the Administration, and among respected politicians. It is putting it onto practice that is the hard part. As Hagel puts it, it is important to remember what Lyndon Johnson told Senatior Russell, that he knew the Vietnam war could not be won, and yet he did not want to pull out and be the first American President to lose a war. This is a contradiction because if it can't be won its going to be lost under the next President or the one after that, in this case Gerald Ford. Hagel says it not ours to win and lose. Here he points to the interconnectedness and shared interests of all nations. Every great threat to the U.S., whether it is economic, terrorism, nuclear weapons proliferation, health pandemics, environmental degradation, energy or water and food shortages, is also a threat to global partners ansd rivals. So its wrong to view engagements in Iraq and Afghanistan through the lens that says its about winning or losing. And he asks win what? Too many cultural, ethnic and religious dynamics are involved for any one nation to control. Hagel concludes by saying that the US, the Defense Department, the Obama administration, must get this right, as it affects the global architecture for the next generation. Fresh thinking is needed. Single issue engagement is obsolete in the 21st century in dealing with global partners or rivals, or countries with aspects of both....

LyrArc Article Gist
An assessment of progress in free trade and generating jobs in N. America under the NAFTA agreement between the U.S., Canada and Mexico. The agreement was signed under President Clinton in 1994. NAFTA removed existing tariffs on over half of the exports from Mexico to the U.S. and phased out remaining tariffs between the U.S., Canada and Mexico. The U.S. had two way trade of $918 billion with Canada and Mexico in 2010, according to the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative. Canada is the U.S.'s top trading partner, with $462 billion in trade through Sept. 2012, and U.S. trade with Mexico- expected to overtake China- is at $369 billion in the same 9 month period of 2012.

LyrArc Article Gist
Afghan warlord of a previous era Hekmatyar is proving difficult to buyout or win over, a strategy pursued with Iraqi insurgents. Younger Taliban insurgents are even harder to convert or buyout. THis raises questions about the chances of this kind of effort succeeding in Afghanistan, especially considering the "allergy" to foreign presence or foreign boots on the ground among Afghan people and the part religious fervour plays. Religious fervour was much less of a factor with Iraqi Sunni insurgents. Add to this the terrain differences, between desert and high mountains, makin the kind of house to house searches and securing of areas extremely difficult.

LyrArc Article Gist
Lt. Gen Zahir ul-Islam takes over as director general of the ISI, Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence Directorate, a key part of Pakstan's Army. The role of Army chief Kayani and ul-Islam now become critical in forging a U.S. peace settlement in Afghanistan.

LyrArc Article Gist
Richard Barrett, former head of overseas counter terrorism operations of Britain and now head of the UN AlQuaeda and Taliban monitoring group, in aspeech to the Washington Institute of Near East Policy, says Al Quaeda is a diminishing threat because a new generation of Muslims who have little recollection of the events and are less interested in religion. And CIA officials say they are having greater success penetrating Al Quaeda, because of vastly improved intelligence capabilities. In terms of intelligence and capabilities, the technical colllection, intercepts are much better, and overhead surveillance is much better. The human intelligence is much better and they have fewer competent people.

LyrArc Article Gist
Russian ambassador to Kabul Mr Kabulov talks about his experience in the Russian Afghan war when was the top KGB person in Kabul. He describes what he learned from the war, which he is telling Americans there and Nato forces leaders there. He makes a couple of important points. First, he says the Soviet record is largely unknown or unpresented, when it comes to helping modernize Afghan society in the cities like Kabul. This modernizing mission led to billions of rubles being spent on education, advancing the role of women, and building roads, dams and an industrial infrastructure. Of the mistakes Americans are making, he lists them one by one. "Because we deployed very easily into the major cities, we did'nt give much thought to what was happening in the countryside." He says there is an "irritative allergy" in the countryside, which is hard to control in a vast mountainous region, has historical basis which the British experienced, and is easy to stir up by sending large number of troops from European or Western powers. When these troops have to take retailatory steps such as destroying villages where insurgents are found along with the civilians there. That is why he thinks increasing American troop levels to double troop strength from current Nato levels of 65,000, can only stir up this"irritative allergy." The Soviets had 140,000 troops and this did not help. What he thinks would have beeen better was to let the Afghan army do the job, and for the Russians to say goodbye. America may be about to do just that, but in the meantime there may be an effort to create a respected Afghan government and army which inspires confidence and support in the meantime. What is clearly different here is that America is not fighting a proxy war with a superpower, and it is fighting awar for the soul of Pakistan now, so that at some point the wholehearted support of the people of Pakistan may be marshalled, especially if the Taliban alienate moderate Islamic Pakistanis and America can wean away Afghan Islamic moderates and get rural support from tribes and other sources....

LyrArc Article Gist
Underreporting of coronavirus cases in China poses risks for other nations in not giving them a sense of the magnitude and severity of coronavirus. This leads to a false sense of security- in Japan, Sweden and other countries, much delayed action and a sense of exceptionalism that we can ride this thing through like an ordinary virus, In the U.S. and Italy, Spain, UK and Germany, loss of crucial weeks before taking action. Looking to the future this poses new risks as it still leaves people without a sense of how long to continue lockdowns.  The pandemic poses huge risks for Asia and Latin America because of poverty, crowded conditions and sanitation levels. The early action by prime minister Modi was a huge step in the right direction before coronavirus spread could damage the economy and people- as Mr. Modi said if not done right such as with a 21 day lockdown this could set India back by 21 years. It had value in that it alerted other countries such as Philippines, Indonesia, Malaysia, Bangladesh, Pakistan to take strong action early. As the WSJ says here in this essay by what is important for China and all other countries reporting on coronavirus is that this reporting is vital only because it can save many other countries from making costly mistakes. Which is why the direct doctor to doctor contact between Chinese doctors and American doctors is an encouraging right step, says WSJ.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Freeman contrasts the speeches given by Obama and Trump, one in Cairo after becoming president, and the other in Riyadh. Freeman says Obama did not give enough credit to American leadership and progress on women's rights, and was not critical of Iran during a period in which sectarian strife has led to the situation in Syria and Iraq. 

LyrArc Article Gist
WSJ reporters tell the story of Chuck Hagel of Nebraska from his early days in Vietnam, a cellphone business venture, Senator during the Iraq war, gradual shift to opposing the Iraq war, serving on the Senate Foreign Relations Commitee with Senator Obama, and the bond established with Obama over American involvement in the Middle East.

LyrArc Article Gist
Chuck Hagel answers questions in the U.S. Senate about his views on the Iraq and Afghanistan surge, on sanctions against Iran, and nuclear disarmament. Hagel says the U.S. must engage not retreat in the world, and discussed his world view without getting drawn into details about policy issues. He faces a difficult nomination for U.S. Defense Secretary with skepticism from Republicans. Hagel opposed both surges and says the right approach is bilateral disarmament for nuclear weapons.