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.


Le Monde.fr Original article ›
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.     ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi will spend Tuesday night August 2 in Taipei, Taiwan. China has threatened severe consequences and Taiwanese forces are on alert. Yet with over $1 trillion in China's exports to US and EU in 2021 the response will have to take this into account as also the US and EU to redesign its supply chains. This is the first trip of a senior US official to Taiwan as Speaker Pelosi comes next to the Vice President to succeed the presidency. The US response to the Russian attack on Ukraine was made in Biden's word as a deterrent to China in its role in the Indo-Pacific region. The Pelosi trip may be a reflection of this policy that seeks to maintain the US position that Indo-Pacific is international waters, that US policy will continue as before undeterred by actions such as the Russian attack on Ukraine with the support of China. And that US will engage fully with allies in the Indo-Pacific- Indonesia, Singapore, Malaysia and Taiwan. And that is doing this with the cooperation of its allies in the region- Australia, Japan and India. US and EU imports from China are $541 and $522 billion over $1 trillion for 2022. Loss of even a significant portion of these exports from major tensions in the region would have a severe impact on Chinese economic growth. The US and EU are already engage in redesigning the supply chain and would also face problems in a transition similar to the gas rationing in Germany after cutoff of Russian supplies. The trade is too big a factor at this time. ...
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Anton Troianovski reports for NYT from Geneva on the talks between Russian foreign minister Sergei Ryabkov and US Deputy Secretary of State Wendy Sherman on the Russian proposals for redrawing of the boundaries between Russia and Eastern Europe. Russia has insisted talks take place without the Europeans. The Russian view is that the current borders with strong US presence in Eastern Europe- in Poland, the Baltics, Ukraine, and other parts of Eastern Europe were a result of the new borders being thrust on a weakened Russia after the collapse of the Soviet Union.  The US insists it will not do anything without working with its European allies, but is willing to look for some areas of common ground. European Union and Germany see the new Eastern Europe formed as a result of the self determination of countries in the region, and their right to choose their future. Ukraine was historically close to Russia. After the collapse of the Soviet Union Ukraine had developed two identities with eastern parts of the country closer to Russia reflecting earlier close ties and the western parts of Ukraine closer to Poland such as cities Lviv and Kiev reflecting the mood in Poland and Baltics for an independent Ukraine. Lviv is only 70 kilometres from the Polish border and shows traces of the Austro-Hugarian central European heritage. Kiev is about 300 miles from the Polish border in north central Europe. Elections led to governments alternating between close ties to Russia and distant ties to Russia with the two recent governments opposed to Russian interference in its affairs. President Putin responded with invasion of Crimea and forming an autonomous region in eastern Ukraine. In the latest move Putin seeks to reset the borders in a way that is favorable to Russia.   ...
The Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The US under president DJT puts out a new National Security Strategy in a document which states it clearly. The days of the Middle East given importance are thankfully over it says. The focus is on the First Islands, from Taiwan, Philippines to Japan for strengthening defense in relation to China. The Monroe Doctrine is now part of US foreign policy with a DJT addition- "that the American people- not foreign nations or globalist institutions- will always control our own destiny in our hemisphere."  It also means the US has a new policy towards Russia and for NATO.  The DJT administration priority, it states, is “ending the perception, and preventing the reality, of NATO as a perpetually expanding alliance.” The new strategy is that Europe needs to “take primary responsibility for its own defense.” The Monroe Doctrine and the disassociation with NATO expansion are linked. How so? Russia's foreign policy is for winning recognition as a Northern European Power with its own version of the Monroe Doctrine, being able to control its destiny in its sphere of influence. The way the Monroe Doctrine was implemented in 1823 was by a tacit recognition gained from Britain that it would support the US in its idea of no European colonial powers (France, Spain other ) being allowed to interfere in Latin America, in the western hemisphere. In 2025 the way the Monroe Doctrine is implemented with the DJT Corollary is that the US is tacitly gaining support from Russia/China for implementing the Monroe Doctrine so that no foreign powers will interfere in US sphere influence in the western hemisphere.  Where does this leave Europe and Ukraine? European Union and NATO expansion has now gone too far and NATO which was primarily for Cold War struggle between Communism and US/UK style democracies is over, but NATO has not been disbanded, or a new alliance setup with new goals. Instead as it lingers on it has created new problems such as NATO expansion to the borders of Russia, creating security risks for Russia. This has led to the war in Ukraine and the Republican administration under DJT seeks to defuse tensions and the Ukraine war by excluding NATO expansion, removing the US from European security by delegating that back to Europe (Germany and France, Italy, UK) and by acting as a moderating influence between Russia and Germany, France, that see Russia as a threat after it's attack on Ukraine. US also upholds the policy and principle of no nation invading another country, as Russia did with Ukraine, and in anticipation of the China threat to Taiwan. This part gets nuanced but the overall policy is coherent and Russia accepts this, China is gradually coming to the idea that it has to accept this situation with Taiwan to preserve its economic advances and its exports to the US and EU.  In practice once the interference of China or Russia is removed and European powers in addition, the US has freedom of action in the Western hemisphere and Latin America to prevent crises such as with drug trafficking gangs in Mexico and Venezuela, and unstable regimes sending people north to the US across the Mexican border as from Central America and Venezuela.   ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Is time slipping away for Russia to restore what it sees as its special relationship with Ukraine, as Ukraine finds its own identity through its language and independent Orthodox Christian Church since 2019. This WSJ podcast report is by James Marson who lived in Kiev from 2007 to 2012, and Ryan Knutson, with the Archbishop of St Michael's cathedral in Kiev, and the editor of Elle magazine edition in Ukraine joining in.  To understand Ukraine one has to know that Russian is the language of the cities, which means people in Kiev speak Russian. People in the countryside Ukrainian. This is very unusual for a nation and it shows the condition of the country for centuries where intellectuals in cities dominated cultural and political life distant from the people in the countryside. For centuries Ukraine was dominated alternately by either Poland and Lithuania or Russia other than a period of 200 years around 1250-1400 when the Mongols were dominant. The peasants and countryside suffered greatly as in India and other parts of central Europe in the long history till the modern period in 1900.  Russians see their origins in the Kyivan Rus, a state bringing together the different ethnicities Ukrainian and Russian in the period 1000-1240 under the Byzantine Church in Constantinople. Kyiv, the modern capital of Ukraine called Kiev today being the capital of this state. This is the cultural connection that president Putin and Russians see as one they do not want to see drift away. After the Russian state drove out the Mongols in 1240 the northern provinces and Kiev became part of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, and the rest became part of a new Russian state. After 1650 Ukraine became part of the Russian Empire and by 1800 with the partition of Poland was fully made part of the Russian Empire. Russian is now after 1800 the language of the intellectual class in Kiev and the cities, and Ukrainian language persists in the countryside. In 1804 Ukrainian is banned as a language and subject of instruction in schools. The end of the Russian Empire under the Tsars in 1917 ended the ban on the Ukrainian language and a period of respect of the cultures of the different soviet republics including Ukraine ensued. Putin has strong feelings on Kyiv, or modern Kiev, as the place where Russia as a country began. He wrote a 7000 word essay says this report in WSJ in 2010 on this relationship as he sees it.  Yet the period of protests in Kiev since 2010 has resulted in Ukraine building  its own identity as a nation. Magazines in the country are required to use Ukrainian for 50% of their circulation. People in Kiev now use Ukrainian instead of Russian as the sense of national identity is being revived. During 1917-1921 Ukraine fought a war with the Bolsheviks after the Russian Empire collapsed. This history is why Russia is acting now to push for Ukraine not drift completely away. It is also what makes Ukraine different from Poland which has cultural ties to Western Europe. It is why the US or Germany is not willing to go to war with Russia over Ukraine, as it would over Poland. It is also why Russia may not see war as the best option as about one third of Ukrainians say they will fight to defend their country, according to this report. The situation is complex and this is why both sides want to negotiate some way out in which Russia wants the US and NATO respecting its sense of connection with Ukraine in its history with Kyiv as the place Russian state started, and Russia not going further. Russia's tangible proposal is for no to Ukraine joining NATO or the European Union. The US and Germany want something else- the right of Eastern European nations that suffered from Tsarist or Soviet domination or German Hapsburg domination to finally be able to assert their own right of self-determination as democratic countries. This would include Finland. And also Sweden. Ukraine is not another small Eastern European country. Population is 44 million and it is the second largest by area in Europe after Russia.  Russia may also see the move to bring this up at this time as a way to unify the country against what it sees as threat from NATO. As Brendan Simms of Cambridge notes in his recent book -Europe, France went through a period after 1600 when it needed external danger as a way to unify the country, as much as unity of the country to fight external danger. The economic costs after building Nordstream II pipeline are to0 great for both Russia and Germany, and for the US and Russia during the pandemic, which means there is a real need to find a way out for all sides.     ...
France 24 Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A nuclear plant in a war zone with repeated shelling? This is taken up in this debate video of 44 minutes in FR24 which you can click on. The world has not seen this since the start of nuclear energy from plants in the 1950's. Calder Hall the first UK nuclear power station and the first in western Europe started in 1956. Eisenhower opened the first US nuclear power station Shippingport on the Ohio river in Pennsylvania, 50 kilometres from Pittsburgh in 1958 as part of the Atoms for Peace Program. The US built 54 nuclear plants that are operating today in 2022 generating 50% of the renewable energy in use today in the US. The question is what does the unthinkable conducted by the Russians and Ukrainians, by weaponizing a nuclear plant do to public perception of the safety of the Atoms for Peace Program initiated by president Eisenhower in 1954? What does this damaging of public safety perceptions after Fukushima do to the Atoms for Peace type of programs in China India, and European Union that are part of the emissions cutting programs in the world? These are serious questions at a time when climate change is not simply a word but means floods, fires, drought, and declining food production all over the world from Spain to Pakistan, from Germany to China. China and India are affected. China has 53 nuclear plants in 2021 with 50 GW and plans to double this by 2030. India has 22 nuclear plants  with 8 GW in 2021 and plans to triple this to 22 GW by 2030. How will climate change be tackled with public safety perceptions affected with another nuclear accident like that in Fukushima arising from shelling of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant. As the president of the UN Security Council Zhang Jun of China clearly stated at the UN SC meeting last week that China opposed use of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant by Russia (or Ukraine) in any way that could lead to damaging nuclear safety leading to an unintended accident. China only gets about 5% of its energy from nuclear, India about 3%, and this will need to increase multiple times to tackle climate change. France gets 70% of its energy from nuclear, the US 20%, by comparison. Nuclear energy safety and clear rules to prevent weaponizing of nuclear plant zones is essential and a solution like that developed for the food grain shipments from Odessa through Black Sea to the Mediterranean has to be arranged quickly. ...
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Obama fever and the toning down of it after the first Berlin visit, and the feeling that things are coming back to normality between Germany and the USA.
Le Monde.fr Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
How did it come to this the 125% US tariff on China? China thinks it is it's success. American companies have deindustrialized the US taking out it's manufacturing by shipping it overseas destroying the American middle class and working class.  An insult to the American worker whose pride and dignity and efforts rebuilt the world after the Second World War helping Europe and Japan, China, rebuild. Pouille and Thibault of Le Monde of France look at how China advanced in the years 2004 to 2024 and surged from 9% of industrial production in the world to 29% more than US, Japan, Germany and India combined.   This is also the period of three wars Iraq and Afghanistan and Syria and two presidents Bush and Obama 16 years in which the US took its eyes of the ball and let this situation take hold, which would inevitably lead to a response from the US which started with US president DJT in 2016 and is now in its 10th year. Having failed to limit the China 2025 Plan so that there is no overconcentration of manufacturing in the world disproportionately affecting the rest of the world. The consequences for the rest of the world are clear to see with the 1.7 billion people in India and Indonesia who were late in industrialization by 10-15 years compared to China, the deindustrialization of Europe and the US as this enters its final stages leading to the fissures in the societies of Europe and the US, the destruction of the middle class. ...
The New York Times Original article ›
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. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This report in WSJ looks at the impact of the 2018 Trump tariffs retained by president Biden as the US seeks to reduce its overdependence on Chinese imports and bring back American manufacturing. This followed misguided policies of previous administrations since Clinton that weakened American manufacturing strengths. Have the US tariffs on Chinese goods worked? The WSJ graph with information from US Census Bureau shows that imports from China in 2022 going down to the levels in 2007 of about 16-17% as a share of US imports, down from a high of 21% before the Trump tariffs halted a rapidly rising curve. Imports from Germany, South Korea and Japan in 2022 were down slightly hovering around 4.5%. Imports increased from Canada and Mexico, the US's traditional partners in North America, around 13.5% as a share of US imports for each country. Also increasing were imports from Vietnam. Some of the imports from Vietnam are Chinese products shipped through Vietnam to evade tariffs, and it is not clear whether the figures from Vietnam have been adjusted for this. President Biden is looking at different scenarios in an effort to tackle inflation. One supported by Janet Yellen, an economist at US Treasury is for the US to relax some of the China tariffs. Most economists in previous administrations including Yellen failed to understand what surrendering American manufacturing to China on the scale and speed that happened would do to communities across America that depended on factory jobs. The devastation of these communities has led to increased divisions in America, weakened American manufacturing, and led to outflow of technologies vital for national security and national well being.  Republican senators, US Trade Representative Katherine Tai and National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan are opposed to any relaxation of tariffs. Studies show the removal of the tariffs would have only a small impact on the consumer price inflation index reducing inflation by 0.26%. Lifting some tariffs on school supplies and summer bicycles as proposed by the US Chamber of Commerce would have little or no impact on the consumer price index for inflation. This is because the inflation is triggered by oil and gas price increases stemming from the Russian policies and invasion of Ukraine. This has also aggravated food and grocery costs  through blocking of agricultural imports from Ukraine. An additional factor was the increased demand after the pandemic easing in 2022, but that demand is already easing in July with glut in inventories at Walmart and Target, and excess warehouse capacity at Amazon. It would also send the wrong signal to China that the tariffs imposed by president Trump after a Section 301 trade investigation and based on improper loss of technologies to China are not being taken seriously by the US, says Republican Senator Hagerty of Tennessee. The Labor advisory committee to the US Trade Representative Katherine Tai also opposes any such move after the serious damage done to US workers and to US national well being and security. This happened under the Clinton, Bush and Obama administrations with failed trade policies that ceded manufacturing to China. ...
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
U.S. senior Republican Senators Lindsay Graham of South Carolina and John McCain of Arizona, are getting ready to launch a wide ranging probe of Russian interference in the U.S. 2016 presidential election through cyber attacks. The probe is not limited to DNC hacking and the concern is not just that any one candidate was targeted but for the integrity of the American election process. Even though it is not mentioned in this report in the Washington Post by Demirjian, Senators and Congressmen from the Republican Party in charge of key committees of oversight on foreign policy and defense now see it as their responsibility to prevent an enlargement of cyberattacks as Germany and France face elections. Mr. Trump has said in an interview with Time magazine that Russia was not responsible for cyber attacks, that it "could have been China, it could have been some guy in New Jersey." Senator McCain is readying a probe into cyber attacks into U.S. weapons systems, and U.S. military, as the issue widens in its scope and significance for the West and for the U.S. and its allies in Europe and Asia. Senate Select Intelligence Committee Chairman Richard Burr (N.C.) will be working closely with McCain, Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman, on this particular issue and Senator Mitch McConnell has been apprised of the discussions, according to this report in WP. Senator Graham said- "They'll keep doing more here until they pay a price." Graham will hold a series of investigative hearings in 2017 about Russian meddling and "misadventures throughout the world."  This will include new legislation.  Graham told CNN on Dec. 7, 2016 in strong language- "I am going after Russia in every way you can go after Russia. I think they are one of the most destabilizing influences on the world stage. I think they did interfere with our election, and I want Putin personally to pay the price." During the debates Governor Pence of Indiana, the Vice President elect took a strong position on Russia, and the Vice President's positions on foreign policy and defense are similar to that of the Republican leaders in Congress.  It is hard to remember a time in the post war period when there was such a distinct difference in foreign policy and defense as it relates to Russia between a Republican president and both a Republican Congress and almost all Republican governors. Senator Corker from Tennessee, who heads the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, is on the short list to be Secretary of State. A related story in the WSJ shows the selection of military leaders for key intelligence, defense and homeland security, and Gen. Petraeus considered for foreign policy, as diverging from historical practice of keeping civilian oversight preeminent in the U.S.. Rep. Peter King, an early supporter of Trump, who is on committees for intelligence and counterterrorism told MSNBC, that he is confident that Trump will not be "taken in by Putin." The U.S. Republican dominated Congress has taken a strong position on Russian interference in Syria and Ukraine. In the House of Representatives Republican Rep. Devin Nunes from California and Rep. Mac Thornberry from Texas are leading efforts on cyber and intelligence as heads of their committees. ...
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
 Harris's role for the Border was limited to telling Central American migrants to stay home. Much of the migration was a result of wars started in the Reagan years in Central American states of Nicaragua and San Salvador. This destabilized the region and led to gangs taking over parts of the country in San Salvador and entrenching Castro style regime in Nicaragua, leading to outward migration of young people. As this report points out Harris was supposed to take on decades of such misguided policies in Central America in a few months. A drought hit agricultural coffee regions of Guatemala increasing migration. Her role instead was to ensure several wins. Win No.1 to generate stability setting up the peaceful transfer of power in Guatemala, singling out corrupt regimes. Win No. 2 to generate jobs. US AID and IFDC loans were increased, foreign investment attracted to generate 250,000 jobs. Win No. 3 the increased stability led to gradually declining migration from Central America. What replaced it was Venezuela. And that is a repeat story of Reagan style wars in Central America. Under the Trump Administration the US did not take up the Monroe Doctrine and act directly to support a stable fairly elected government in Venezuela, an obvious solution. Instead going half way- destabilizing the government but then left it on its own. The result about a third of the population leaving the country in these years to Colombia and other parts of Latin America in a immense humanitarian tragedy.  In 2023 Venezuelans not Guatemalans entered at the US Border in large numbers, most of them middle class families that left Venezuela after hyperinflation and mismanagement of the economy. Realizing the danger by January 2024 Biden negotiated with Senate Minority Leader McConnell and his Republican representative Senator Lankford to pass legislation in the Senate closing the Border. All that was needed was the House to act and 30 years of Border problem would be solved.This was blocked in the House by new Speaker Mike Johnson on advice from former president Trump who chose to use the issue in the 2024 election. Biden then used his executive powers to close the Border leading to lower numbers of migrants under Biden by July 2024 than under Trump. Migration Border Czar was never a term used by Democrats in the Obama and Biden years. Biden who also served in a role given migration as one of the issues to handle under Obama, had this as only one of his assignments. Biden played more important roles in foreign policy with his experience as chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee for decades. Border policy was made by president Obama and his advisers. The same is true of Harris, Border policy being done by president Biden and his advisers. Similar to Biden's role as VP Harris was given assignment to cover foreign policy and was the US representative at 3 Munich Security Conferences in 2021-2024 following the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Chancellor Scholz of Germany said of Harris last week that he had full confidence in Harris as both competent and experienced. ...
SPIEGEL ONLINE Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The knowledge that the virus  caused human to human transmission and that it spreads to wide parts of the population very quickly were critical pieces of information that remained with Chinese epidemiologists, doctors and medical researchers, and were suppressed by local authorites in Wuhan.  Yet China's version of the U.S. CDC, China's Centre of Disease Control and Prevention, modeled on the U.S. control efforts worked effectively to identify the problem. Virologist Gao Fu, heads China's CDC. This report in Germany's Der Spiegel says Mr. Fu made it a habit to scan China's internet before bedtime for any signs of possible disease outbreaks. On the night of December 30 he came across rumors of an internal memo from the Wuhan Health Commission of an outbreak of a vaguely worded lung disease. When he called the Wuhan health authority he found their answers to be evasive which alarmed him. The next morning December 31 Mr. Fu sent the first of three teams to Wuhan which is how China was able to identify the problem, in the sense that Chinese authorites in Beijing were to rely on Dr Gao Fu to overcome the problem of Wuhan provincial authorites. He informed the World Health Organization Beijing office on that day. The Der Spiegel report says "shortly afterward," the Seattle Times in its report says this was about New Years Day 2020- Mr Fu made a call to Dr. Redfield, head of the U.S. Centre for Disease Control, who was on vacation. Redfield is deeply disturbed on hearing this from Fu and they have conversations over the next few days to the point that Dr. Gao Fu is in tears about what has happened. On January 1 Taiwanese public health authorites shared the information with WHO that the cornonavirus was a human to human transmission, would the Taiwanese authorites not have shared it with the U.S. the same week during calls from the U.S. CDC or other public health authorites alarmed about the situation. (The WHO was proving useless by Jan 14 when it contradicted Taiwan's more reliable assessment  on Jan 14 going by the letter from president Trump to WHO). On January 6 a few days later Dr Redfield and Dr. Azar head of Health and Human Services ask China for permission to send a team of CDC U.S. experts to China. This is cited in the U.S. letter to the World Health organization- the lack of human to human transmission information being given to the U.S. officially early by China. A risk that could have been a topic of conversation between the U.S. and China heads of CDC. That letter from president Trump also points out that the team of experts the U.S. planned to send was not accepted by China till Feb 16, one and half months after that series of conversations between Dr. Gao Fu of China CDC and Dr. Redfield of U.S. CDC in an alert message.  In effect removing one of the key defences for the U.S. and Europe in making their own defensive actions and plans, laying the basis of the worldwide coronavirus pandemic affecting millions of people. Dr Redfield is a AIDS researcher at the University of Maryland who spent most of his life trying to control spread of HIV and was appointed by president Trump to head CDC agency in 2018. He set a goal of eliminating AIDS by 2030 and is more comfortable with aids patients and research than the bureaucratic nature of agencies- CDC has about 11,000 employees. Once it was clear that a team of U.S. experts was not given permission to make its own assessment in Wuhan in the few days after January 6 offer to sent the team to China by Redfield of U.S. CDC and Dr. Azar, would it have alerted the U.S. that something was seriously heading the wrong way for a epidemic risk. That letter of president Trump cites how the head of WHO during the first SARS crisis in 2003, Dr. Harlem Brundtland acted when she faced China's lack of cooperation during that crisis by saying openly that this was a danger to world public health and millions. Could CDC in the U.S. and the other connected health authorites have taken the responsibility and filled Dr Brundtland's role in this crisis, that the WHO failed to perform?    ...
SPIEGEL ONLINE Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Spiegel Online's interview with Emmanuel Macron, on the TGV 8434 train from Bordeaux to Paris. He is joined by Mrs. Macron. Macron says he is aware that he does not have a bloc of core support like Ms. Le Pen, yet he says this means he will try that much harder for voters on the right and the left. He says their is no political renewal in the political class in France and that it remains closed. He says particular attention must be paid to rural France outside big cities like Bordeaux, Lyon, Marseille and Paris, where people have had a different encounter with globalization. On the European Union he sees the need to revitalize it by having a closer union focussed on countries that are interested in this. He sees the need for a joint finance minister and permanent head of Euro Group. This might be a smaller EU without countries such as Britain, and others who are not interested in a closer union. He does not agree with the idea that any member state of the EU can stop other member states from proceeding. Macron does not believe in moving to the right as in the Dutch election because he says people are "not idiots" and in France this has not worked for Nicholas Sarkozy, which has some truth to it as authenticity (and humility) matters to French voters. A personal approach worked for Fillon early on till the scandal over payments he received. Macron brings to this personal approach and relative youthfulness, his sense that he must appeal to all segments, rural and urban, educated and less educated, and at the same time be true to core values such as preserving the European Union, and authenticity in terms of views on Algeria. He also says he is aware he faces risks but that this is something he believes in deeply.   Macron has not hesitated to express his views on topics such as Algeria, calling it a crime against humanity, and later elaborating on what he meant. Macron says his movement En Marche is different in style and manner from the closed nature of French politics. He believes in transparency, term limits, and removing conflicts of interest in French politics, as a way to make a fresh start. The first round of voting is on April 23, 2017, followed by a second round of voting between two candidates.  ...
DW.COM Original article ›
DW.COM Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A hydropower dam in the Stiegler Gorge in Tanzania is being built at a cost of $4 billion. With an output of 2.1 gigawatts it will double Tanzania's electricity production. More electricity should result in less felling of trees to burn for charcoal to do cooking. According to UNDP only 10% in rural areas have electricity in Tanzania. At a practical level this means a child cannot have a light bulb at night to create the light in which to read. Darkness descends on villages in rural areas with bita and fragments of light - solar and lamps. German aid for the project was debated in parliament because of the work on the Rufiji river and disruption for the Selous Game Reserve used by tourists. The area for work to be done is 1000 square kilometres and the Game Reserve is covering 50,000 square kilometres so that efforts can be made to meet electricity goals and maintain the Reserve in its new form. President Magufuli is moving forward with the project with Tanzania's pressing needs for electricity. In recent years, Brazil, China and India have also placed these concerns as a priority in developing their hydropower resources. This also reduces the need to burn coal because of its effects on health.   ...
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Key points in Putin annexation speech are shown in the Washington Post. Putin presented an anti-western view that went over European history of colonialism in Africa and Asia. It presented a Russian nationalist view oof European powers and the US as trying to diminish Russia throughout history, that refers more to the British than for the country that emerged from British colonies in America with the idea that "all men are created equal." This was similar to a speech made at the beginning of the conflict in Ukraine that stated some of the same points. Putin referred also to the use of total bombing on Dresden, Hamburg and Cologne, by the US and Britain, and the nuclear bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki by the US in 1945, the US action in the Vietnam war. Putin's view- "I emphasize that one of the reasons for the centuries old Russophobia, the undisguised malice of these western elites toward Russia is precisely that we did not allow ourselves to be robbed during the period of colonial conquests. We forced the Europeans to trade for mutual benefit." About this version of history of European colonial powers - it is not entirely true, because as Cambridge historian Brendan Simms points out in his  book-  Europe- the Struggle for Supremacy  from 1453 to the Present,  Russia is itself throughout this period one of these European powers. Russia was also one of the powers present in China before the Boxer Rebellion in 1900, and in 1901 when the concessions were drawn from China in that period. Of the military force of 19,000 that entered Beijing in 1900 and crushed the Boxer rebellion of local Chinese calling for ouster of foreigners from China, Britannica.com shows that most of the them came from Russian and Japan, with lesser numbers from Britain, France, the US and Austria Hungary.  After suppressing the Boxers the foreign powers including Russia, Japan, Britain, France, Germany, Austria-Hungary and also the US asked for reparations and concessions on Chinese ports. Tsingtao went to Germany, The British and Russians getting concessions in Tianjin. Only America stated under president Woodrow Wilson that the reparations were excessive. Wilson converted American reparations into funding for Beijing's first modern university Tsinghua University, where  many of China's leaders were educated. During the period 1901 to 1945 the US opposed British colonialism in India and China. The US opposition with its Pacific fleet was strong enough to prevent further division of China among the colonial powers. In the 1940's the US under Franklin Roosevelt and his representative in China General Jospeh Stilwell carried out the campaign against the Japanese invasion of China so that the national integrity of China could be preserved. Stilwell called for reforms of the corrupt Chiang Kai Shek Koumintang government which rejected Stilwell's advice. Leading to its gradual collapse to the Communists under Mao-tse-tung, as the popular support shifted. It is now known what exchanges took place between Franklin Roosevelt and British governments including Churchill and Clement Attlee, and it can be said that the US under FDR was always putting pressure on the British Empire to free India from colonial rule. In 1942 there is the letter from Gandhi at Wardha to Roosevelt asking for help just before the Quit India movement, and Roosevelt's response is clear in the way he told Churchill by 1943 that America would never go along with Britain's unfair and impoverishing rule of India after winning the war. Roosevelt did not need Churchill's "growling" response, he had already put the British as a junior and much diminished partner. American help was crucial in convincing the British to quit India, which is also why it happened so quickly after 1945.  During the Soviet occupation of Eastern Europe after defeating Germany in 1945, much of Eastern Europe came under Soviet and Russian domination. Poland was partitioned between Germany then called  Prussia, Austria and Russia, as colonial powers in 1772, followed by further partitions. The roots of the Ukraine crisis in some ways involve Poland and Polish history, as Lviv is only 70 kilometres from Poland. As the view on the Ukrainian side reflects this colonial history of Russia and of Germany in western parts of Ukraine. America under Abraham Lincoln fought a great war of Emancipation to live up to the document of the Declaration of Independence of 1776 that "all men are created equal." The United States of America did not look to colonial possessions for its wealth because of the abundant land in a new continent and the early developments of the Industrial Revolution. Of rail, steamship, of mechanized agriculture and industrial production, in the period after 1850 that made America unrivaled in its industrial strength right upto the 1950's, and  which continues to the present day.  The industrial development of of Japan and South Korea, then of China, and now in India would not be possible without the  hand extended out by America to nations in Asia,  a benevolent hand in creating a tide that lifts all boats. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Yascha Mounk says Germany is not as committed to the West as it was in the days of chancellor Adenauer. Policies pursued by Gerhard Schroeder distancing Germany from the U.S. were also carried on under chancellor Merkel.
New York Times Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The Ifo survey of business confidnce in Germany declined to 102.3 points in August 2012 from 103.2 in July 2012, the lowest since March 2010.
The New York Times Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A call from German chancellor Angela Merkel to the Greek president to hold a referendum on Greece's participation in the eurozone. Political parties in Greece denounced it as considering Greece a "protectorate" coming from the Syriza party, to calling it "unacceptable from the New Democracy party. Karel De Gucht, trade commissioner of the EU, and Olli Rehn commissioner of economic affairs, issue conflicting statements. Gucht says the EU and ECB are working on preparations for Greece's exit, and Rehn says that this in not the case, that Greece is staying in.
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Former finance minister Peer Steinbruck will be the SPD candidate for chancellor of Germany in the 2013 elections. He is is trusted in Germany for his economic experience and handling of the economy during 2008-2009, especially with the eurozone crisis worsening. Helmut Schmidt, a former chancellor has endorsed Steinbruck. He could draw some right wing support from Merkel. Merkel is personally popular in Germany but the CDU has lost elections in key states, and its partner the Free Democrats is considered weak.
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Forget Macron who is simply following French policy in the manner of De Gaulle, says Greg Ip in WSJ. The European Union has already set its policy to decouple its relationships in the supply chain from China, it just calls it something else -"de-risking." The EU he says is even tougher about this than the US. The EU's Leyen has stated: "The Chinese Communist Party's clear goal is a systemic change of the international order with China at its center... We need to ensure that our companies capital, expertise and knowledge are not used to enhance the military and intelligence capabilities of those who are also systemic rivals."  Mikko Huotari, the head of the Berlin based think tank Mercator Institute for Chinese Studies says that the US and the EU arrived at this through a process that went on in parallel. In fact the Scandinavian countries such as Sweden and Denmark, and the Baltic countries came across this much earlier before Biden became president because of acrimonious relations with China. This is also true of countries in Eastern Europe such as Czech Republic.  Germany's position is based on finding a transitional period for decoupling to reduce the impact on its economy. And even China is aware of this situation and looking for a transitional period for decoupling. More significant is the attitude of companies says Greg Ip- companies such as Tesla, Apple and even Airbus that have continued investments in China with little change. And it is this that president Biden is seeking to change with US policy positions. Another less observed aspect of this is the realization of both the US and EU, that the clear and obvious mistake of overconcentration of the supply chain in China was made under Merkel and the Bush-Obama adminstrations. China too realizes that it would have been better off - less recrimination from workers in the US,  and less costly damaging growth that led to climate change- if there was not this much overconcentration of the supply chain in China. In short it benefitted no one, and happened simply because companies sought to take advantage of attractive offers of building in China offered by local governments in China with subsidies from the Chinese government, and the manufacturing capabilities that kept expanding in a virtuous circle as better infrastructure and logistics were built over time. It goes to show that unless governments are vigilant and aware of these risks the unintended can happen with different consequences including destabilizing the social fabric and the political structure of western democracies.  ...
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Simon Johnson, former chief economist at the IMF, and Peter Boone of the London School of Economics, compare the trip made by Jean-Claude Trichet of the European Central Bank and Dominique Strauss-Kahn of the IMF to Berlin to meet Chancellor Angela Merkel and the German Parliament around April 29, 2010, to the trip Treasury Secretary Paulson made to the American Congress in September 2008. The seriousness is of that magnitude. The crisis is that big when you consider that it affects a number of eurozone countries, and the design of the euro currrency system in which Trichet and Strauss-Kahn were involved from the French side has some serious flaws in that it allows boom zone countries to overborrow and overspend. There is no way to resolve the situation through currency devaluations and other measures. Ultimately the cost will be similiar in the range of $1 trillion, say Johnson and Boone. The money would have to come from the G-20, and the IMF would have to represent the G-20 in negotiations with the ECB, the EU and Germany. The euro would have to be devalued and its value go back to $1 which is close to where it started. Eurozone bonds would have to be sold to finance the recovery, and countries that buy these bonds would then hold a proportional asset at the ECB. Johnson says Strauss-Kahn does not have what it takes to make the tough actions happen. His aspirations to run for President in France create a conflict of interest. A replacement is suggested in the Governor of the Bank of Canada, Mark Carney....

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