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.


Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A plan appears to have been put in place by the U.S. and the European Union countries to strengthen the American position in negotiations with Iran underway in Istanbul. The impact on oil prices and on U.S. and E.U. growth as a consequence of higher oil prices, especially when the eurozone countries faced lowed growth, was one of the ways Iran hope to blunt the tightening of sanctions against Iran's nuclear program. It now appears from information released by the International Energy Agency that a plan was implemented by the Saudis in recent months to build up reserve supplies. At the same time a similiar effort was being implemented to increase production in Iraq and Libya so that it would add to reserves added by the Saudis. Daily output from OPEC countries increased by about 1.4 millon barrels in the Sept 2011- March 2012 period, as the confrontation with Iran took shape with increasing pressure using sanctions on Iranian oil, according to the IEA. Of this 1.4 million barrels a day increase, one third is from the Saudis and the rest from Iraq and Libya, according to IEA. In March 2012, OPEC oil production increased by 135,000 barrels a day to 31.4 million barrels, mostly from higher output in Iraq. The Saudis have filled up domestic oil inventories and placed an additional 10 million barrels of oil in storage close to markets in Europe and Japan. This suggests that this was part of a quietly implemented plan in cooperation with the U.S. and the EU countries to increase the effectiveness of sanctions and protect global oil supplies from disruptions; even as the U.S. pressured Japan, S. Korea, India and other countries to reduce purchases of Iranian oil. The economies of India, the EU and other countries were already beginning to feel the impact of higher oil prices in the 1st quarter of 2012....
Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
European companies rushed to make new business investment in Iran after the lifting of Iran sanctions with the Iran Nuclear Deal in 2015. This report in the NYT shows companies in Europe were wary that the nuclear detente with Iran would not last. As a result the European exports to Iran up to $12.8 billion in 2017 were up 30% but still ranked Iran as the 33rd largest trading partner, behind Serbia. Other problems were bureaucratic hurdles and a lack of coordination in Iran for moving ahead with projects. After the deal was signed companies such as Peugeot, Airbus, Total, Daimler moved ahead to invest in Iran. Yet the investments were made carefully considering the opposition of the Trump administration. In one deal Airbus agreed to provide 100 new aircraft for Iran Air's aging fleet, yet only 3 were delivered by May 2018. Daimler had a deal with Iran's Khodro vehicle maker for Fuso brand trucks, yet Daimler officials say demand was weak. A deal made by Total to explore for offshore natural gas may require a waiver under a "grandfather clause" say Total officials, or the option to turn over the investment to its minority partner CNPC, a Chinese state owned company. The U.S. ambassador to Germany, Mr. Grennell, says European companies should stop operations in Iran immediately showing the U.S. plans to take stronger action.  ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
King Salman appoints Mohamed bin Nayef, 55 years-old, as the deputy crown prince in Jan. 2015. The crown prince is Muqrin Abdulaziz, 69 years-old. Mohamed Bin Nayef is the son of the Interior Minister, who worked under his father from 1999 till he became the new Interior minister in 2012. Nayef has pursued an aggressive program to remove Al Qaeda in Saudi Arabia. By taking action against all dissent inside Saudi Arabia Nayef has also jailed human rights activists, including the flogging of a blogger critical of the government. The defense minister Prince Mohamed bin Salman, is a son of King Salman. King Salman was defense minister till he succeeded his half-brother Abdullah. Ali al-Naimi continues as Oil minister, a position he has held for decades. Saudi Arabia established a panel in 2006 to work with future kings after King Salman to appoint an heir to the throne. Even with the appointment of Nayef, a grandson of Saudi Arabia's founder, Abdulaziz ibn Saud, as deputy crown prince, the leadership of the country remains within a small number of princes of the royal family. Under the Obama administration the relations between U.S. and Saudi Arabia have become strained with president Obama's failure to intervene in Syria. The Saudi have pursued their own policies since then, in first Bahrain and then Egypt the Saudis supported the monarchy and the military respectively to maintain power in the face of the Arab Spring. The danger is that Saudi policies may be contrary to the U.S. position supporting freely elected governments and basic rights, particularly when it comes to suppression of all dissent including peaceful dissent and normal criticism of government, and yet with the rise of Islamic State the U.S. puts itself inadvertently behind these very policies. The Saudis would say this has happened because U.S. president Obama failed to support the effort for freedom in Syria and a transition in Libya and Iraq (with the added complication of Maliki's sectarian policies), creating a war torn neighborhood in which the Saudis had to act on their own. These are the hidden costs of the policy of the U.S. president for the U.S. and for the Middle East- more sectarianism with Shiites and Sunnis openly in conflict, reversal of hard won gains in Iraq, reversal of the Arab Spring except in Tunisia, war torn Libya and Iraq- with a withdrawal that never truly happened because it required a firmly guided transition period of support in the region with lower cost and involvement of an extended period leaving no room for reversal of gains. It leaves both the Saudis and the U.S. in a more precarious position than a decade ago....
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The protests for democracy continue in Syria in May 2011. On May 20 2011, 26 protesters are gunned down. The Assad government continues to crackdown on the protests. Friedman sees the events in Syria having wide reaching impact on the Middle East. He calls it a keystone nation because of relations with Iran, the Golan Heights, the Lebanese Shiite militia Hezbollah, the long border with Turkey, the border with Iraq, and Hamas relations with Syria. Compared to Egypt the international community has been for the most part silent in its support for the democracy protests in Syria. Friedman also asks the question about rival sects in Syria and other Arab countries and what happens afterwards. Would a post Assad period lead to people from rival sects putting aside differences and working together to build and sustain a democratic government. He says there is uncertainty but also that something deep down is coming to the top in the Arab world- that Arabs want to be full citizens of their countries with a voice in their government and in the way things are run in their countries. ...
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
David Albright, a former weapons inspector in Iraq, says 24 days is enough time for Iran to wipe out traces of nuclear work, such as working with explosives to trigger a weapon or construction of a small plant to make centrifuges. A situation actually happened in 2003 when the atomic energy agency wanted to inspect the Kalaye Electric Company site in Iran in 2003, where Iran was using centrifuges received from Pakistan. Iranians removed all traces of illicit work at the time while delaying inspectors. This case was cited by Olli Heinonen, a former deputy director of the agency. Heinonen says smaller scale activity such as manufacturing uranium components for a nuclear weapon can be carried out and the traces deleted in 24 days. Senator Corker points out that the time allowed would be more than 24 days when all the time is added up correctly.
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This WSJ editorial says only now are European leaders realizing the errors made in leaving the Middle East to its own problems, and not intervening where necessay. It says the risks of not intervening are often higher than of intervening as is being proven in this situation after years of inaction and withdrawal in the Middle East. It points to the difficulties experienced by the Bush administration in turning things around in Iraq, but says by the end of the Bush administration in 2008 things were gradually returning to normal in Baghdad. With the withdrawal from Iraq and no action in Syria under the Obama administration policies of withdrawal from the Middle East, the entire region is unravelling. Europeans and Americans would prefer that what happens in North Africa remains there, says the Journal, but that is not the way it has worked out -with millions of refugees now making their way first to Turkey, Jordan and now to border countries Serbia, Hungary, Greece, overwhelming their resources. Germany's acceptance of 800,000 refugees is a great effort but it too faces the challenge of doing this without creating more anti-immigrant sentiment....
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Attacks from Iran on Saudi oil infrastructure leading to a loss of half of Saudi oil production is likely to be a problem for countries such as China, South Korea and Japan that have reduced oil imports from Iran and increased dependence on Saudi supplies. This was a result of tighter U.S. oil sanctions on Iran. India is also affected. About 30% of the lost production will be restored say Saudis.  The U.S. is less dependent on Saudi supplies and as Gerald Seib points out in a video in WSJ the U.S. has 3 reasons not to intervene on behalf of Saudis. The U.S. has increased its oil production from shale oil and is less dependent on Saudi oil. It is also becoming reluctant to engage in Saudi Arabia's wars such as the one in Yemen against Houthi rebels. There is also less support in Congress and in the country for supporting endless wars that originate from Saudi actions. A Trump tweet before his election campaign shown in WSJ makes this point about endless wars and the U.S. needing to be paid trillions of dollars for these wars. The conflicts in the region affect China and India where growth is close to 5% before any impact from oil price increases. Together Asian countries take in 72% of Saudi oil exports and China now imports more Saudi oil than Russian oil by a wide margin- in June 1.88 million barrels a day. Saudi oil makes about 19% of imported oil in India and 33% for Japan. Imports into India of Saudi oil are up 8% this year to 847,000 barrels a day in 2019. China is better situated than Japan with reserve supplies of 644 days of imports compared to 230 days for Japan. This why Japan has played a constructive role in reducing tensions between the U.S. and Iran and urged both sides to negotiate. China and India also have interests that converge in reducing tensions between the U.S. and Iran. As a first step president Trump removed his National Security Adviser John Bolton in preference for reduced tensions.  ...
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The problem of information providers is linked to the problem of the recipient of the information- the common man in America. For the common man in America these are distant places with strange cultures and manners of living, remote from his everyday existence in an industrialized country. Why should the common man in America care if a small fraction of GNP and a trained military with advanced equipment will be sufficient to deal with situations in remote places. A fast growing economy between 1950- 2000 could also absorb the costs of local conflicts. The reason the common man in America should care is that the economy is expected to grow slowly, so that poor information leading to poor decisions on allocating limited and declining resources for different local conflicts- a war in Iraq costing 1 trillion dollars, and a war in Afghanistan 1 trillion dollars- can compromise future economic security, investment in America and overall defense needs. Especially when money wasted with poor decisions cannot be retrieved or put back in the Treasury, and creates future problems....
BBC News Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The US president tells the King it was special that all members of Congress stood up for a standing ovation many times- something that in recent years rarely happens. The King "has shown his class" in the last 24 hours says BBC, it is now up to Starmer and the British government, DJT and the Americans to make it count. Notable DJT sharing that the King agreed with him that Iran should not have a nuclear weapon. The King also talked about the NATO alliance and its role in keeping the peace for 80 years in the world. In the King's words-  "the international rules that have allowed us to trade and have kept power in balance for 80 years." Adding that the US should not go it alone- "The challenges we face are too great for any one nation to bear alone." However the King is only doing what his is role as monarch to present British interests, and it is important to recall that Britain's interests were once colonial interests around the world, that opposition to these colonial interests led to the Declaration of Independence by Jefferson and Washington in 1776. And caution in Washington's advice to America in Annual messages when it comes to these Empires. Right after 1945 when NATO was created- as it was throughout its Empire in Asia  in 1750-1950- Britain opposed Russia and was the most vocal opponent of Soviet Russia in 1950's and saw NATO in this mission. Times have changed with the emergence of Russia after 1990, China in 1950 and again in 1990's, and America as a world power is best following Washington's advice not to get involved in or inherit the British anti-Russian attitude as it has interests in the Western hemisphere and around the world that require cooperation with other world powers such as Russia, China, India, and Germany to create a peaceful world  and not the kind we have today that puts Russia and China on the wrong side just for opposition, as no powers have any interest in drug and people trafficking in the western hemisphere form places like Mexico and Venezuela, or creating small wars in other parts of the world. A situation NATO as seen by Britain in 1950 as Anti-Russian creates for the US- Lord Hastings Ismay first Secretary General of NATO set British goal for NATO (not the US interests or consistent with George Washington's advice to distance from) in 1949 as "Keep the Russian Out, the US Involved, and the Germans Down." ...
The New York Times Original article ›
dw.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The earlier interactions between US and Iran have turned into an Iranian effort to develop its nuclear capabilities bringing the situation faced today, and showing the failure to find solutions of everything tried before and not helping the people of the Arab World and the Gulf regions.During the Reagan period American involvement under Defense Secretary Rumsfeld to support the Iraqi invasion of Iran in a balancing act. And just a year earlier the Democrat Carter's efforts to look at the Islamic revolution as a response to the CIA's intervention in Iran's internal affairs under Eisenhower's Foreign minister Dulles to secure oil supplies, and efforts to find a way to good relations with Iran. This was followed by the Democrat Obama negotiating with Iran, normalizing relations and Democrat Biden handing over Iranian assets  of hundreds of billions of dollars that were used DJT says to build its military that had suffered badly under the earlier western sanctions under Republican Trump.  It has led to some of the migration from Syria after Russian involvement that flooded Germany with millions of migrants and destabilized European countries democratic processes.  ...
The Guardian Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Mogan McSweeney of Cork Ireland, son of an IRA courier with a politics and marketing degree from Middlesex University, joined the Labour Party in London fighting off Corbyn supporters during the Corbyn leadership till 2019. The Guardian says McSweeney settled on Keir Starmer as the candidate to replace Corbyn as a centrist on the right. It was says the Guardian McSweeney as an organizer against the Corbyn left that installed Keir Starmer in 10 Downing Street. And then by getting Starmer to appoint his mentor Mandelson led to Starmer becoming "the most unpopular prime minister in history." It says May local elections may sound the end of Starmer. McSweeney is blamed for some of Starmer's failure to project a image of firmness as he backtracked on issues on the advice of McSweeney, to the point that many in Labour party thought McSweeney made Labour driverless. As McSweeney ejected all Corbynites from the Labour Party he weakened the party and led to Labour bleeding its vote to the Greens and the Liberals. Labour's got a landslide with many Labour MP's winning by thin margins- its vote was slim only 34% of the vote, itself a warning that something was not right. On immigration the root causes were not addressed till early 2026- the ECHR human rights that needed to be put aside as written with serious flaws and which allowed asylum hotels. This led to a shift to Nigel Farage, called back from retirement to lead Reform UK in 2026 and way ahead of Labour and Conservatives in the polls. Worse 50% of Labour's vote disappeared in 2026 polls by February hardly 2 years after the win in 2024, as the support McSweeney helped organize had no depth of conviction- most of it to Liberals and Greens under Polanski. The result is that even the Guardian is disappointed and says McSweeney installed Starmer as PM and then made him "the most unpopular PM in history." Net favorability in Feb 2026 -57 similar to Sunak of Conservatives in June 2024. A 75% unfavorable rating in Jan 2026. And 14 points below the Labour party in "like" ratings. Only 18% are favorable for Starmer. It shows how a series of British prime ministers with mediocre backgrounds have failed in the country. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Iraq's oil ministry wants to move ahead faster in developing its oil fields and will let foreign oil companies bid for contracts to develop 6 oil fields and 2 natural gas fields by end of 2008. About 40 foreign oil companies from USA, Europe, Japan, China, Russia have been approved for bidding on contracts. According to BP PLC statistics Iraq produces 2.5 million barrels a day, up from 1.9 barrels a day last year, but far below the 3.5 million barrels a day produced in1979. The Iraqi goal is to produce 1.5 million additional barrels a day, but obstacles are the lack of a hydrocarbon law which is not moving quickly, and the Kurdish region signing its own deals, and this announcement may be an effort to go ahead and not wait till a hydrocarbon law is passed and sign agreements which would be technical service agreements for foreign expertise for a fee. Oil revenues are helping stabilize Iraq and as security improves oil can be a big stabilizer with increased production and financing development and job creation and building infrastructure damaged during the war and infrastructure that never existed....
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This video and reports from the G-7 Summit in Les Bains, France is notable for one aspect that was missing throughout previous administrations and provides clues on the discussions that must have taken place for the Iran peace memorandum approach for 90 days of talks. India's Modi is at the table, so is Lula of Brazil, for the first time a G9. Both Lula and Modi are shown at the opposite side of the table from the European leaders. Another picture of the table shows Modi on the right of DJT and Macron on his left suggesting the important role that India has played behind the scenes to the memorandum approach to put the burden of talks on the details to a next 90 day phase of discussion. It makes sense after so many missile attacks and bombing to create a period of calm for discussions. It has also benefits for the US and EU/Japan in G7 now the G-9 with India and Brazil and G-9 plus 1 with Egypt brought in for discussions. This type of involvement and intense discussions to solve conflict are unknown in previous administrations and with no details about the agreement the media is left without a clue. Yet it is clear from this involvement of every major nation, as Lyrarc.com shows however rancorous the disagreements and back and forth including from Merz, Starmer, Macron to DJT, that something significant has been achieved- getting everyone to the table for frank and open discussions for a path forward. That includes G-9 as Lyrarc calls it and Russia, China where talks were held by DJT in Alaska and Beijing in 2025 and 2026. It could be called G-9 + 3 (China, Russia and Egypt). The importance of Egypt is that it is the most populous nation in the Middle East. The issues of food security (fertilizer supply), energy (oil and gas), and nuclear free Middle East are important to all these nations. In addition Pakistan serves on the Board of Peace.  This brings as collective world opinion to help the US lead in its shared goal with these 13 nations to bring about a solution for the people of the world on the nuclear issue and restore each to the path of development and modernization, including Iran with its neighbors support in the best way possible. A good insight into this is evident just from looking at the situation facing Pakistan and also India, both are nuclear powers yet both have suffered (even more so nations with military structures such as the Pakistan military and the Iranian RGC with diversion of resources to military), both Pakistan and India have suffered from the economic crisis with nuclear power making little difference in the lives of the people with shortage of energy and decline in growth.  By bringing in all nations into the discussion on nuclear free Middle East- the US and its partners India, Japan, Brazil, along with Russia and China- a first major step has been achieved to set the path for reindustrialization/infrastructure building in the US and Europe. And for modernization/infrastructure building in India, Pakistan, Egypt and Brazil, sustained development out of middle income status for China. ...
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Why the Straits of Hormuz are a critical path in the seas near Iran and Saudi Arabia through which much of the world's oil supplies flow. With the U.S. gaining oil sufficiency the straits of Hormuz oil supply lanes in the seas are critical to countries such as China, Japan and India which lack enough internal supplies of oil. Japan's prime minister mediated between the U.S. and Iran to keep the oil supplies lanes open and free of the conflicts and rivalry that have taken place in the region. After initially saying Iran was responsible for some tankers that caught fire, president Trump reversed himself saying that it was unintentional. The U.S. maintains oil sanctions on Iran but is careful not to worsen tensions further, and Iran suffering from the sanctions pursues a policy of trying to wait out the U.S. sanctions.

WSJ Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The partition of Iraq would have lead to increased ethnic conflicts and civil war which is what all sides in Iraq recognized. Sunch partitions lead to ethnic cleansing and even more hostilities. As Senor says here the partition would have involved expelling Iraqis from their home on a large scale. A bigger wave than the refugee situation before this from ethnic strife as it would now be official. Compare this to the partition of India. Once its official a huge wave of expelling begins and an official kind of ethnic cleansing occurs as hotilities increase and each of these partitioned areas starts to get outside help from neighboring countries and an arms race in the area begins and new fears are aroused. No question things were bad but it its to the credit of all the Iraqi parties and leaders that they had the good sense to act in the right way. As Senor asks what do you do with Kirkuk which is majority Kurdish but has a large Sunni population. Its also to the credit of Bush advisors and General Petraeus that they continued to persevere when things looked very dim. A further inflammation in Iraq would not affect people in Des Moines or Biden's Delaware so when things get really nasty its easy for an expert or politician in the USA or Europe to take some policy action and then leave leaving that region in Asia or Africa to bear the consequences....
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
President Obama in an interview with Steve Inskeep of National Public Radio says that blue collar men, the white working class, have suffered in the last decade, and Trump is exploiting their fears and anxieties. Yet he made no mention of the large parts of the middle class with low levels of assets, and the extreme inequality discussed by Fed chairwoman Janet Yellen at a Boston Fed conference on inequality in October 2014. Obama addresses the war in Syria and Iraq in a similiar manner by not mentioning the millions of refugees in that region and the million that have created a refugee crisis in Europe. He attributes the problem more to media pursuing ratings than any errors of the administration in this interview with NPR, including some of it directed by pockets in the Republican Party. This ignores the many editorials and op-ed pieces on the subject from both sides of the spectrum, the Wall Street Journal and The Washington Post.
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The Obama administration started the first term in office with efforts at reaching agreement on reducing nuclear arsenals. By the second term of the Obama administration the talks were already faltering. The war in Syria and Iraq and other conflicts in the Ukraine led to worsening relations with Russia. During the first year of the Trump administration that followed the two Obama terms in office the situation is completely reversed from what it was in 2008, showing that more than good intentions are needed to pave the way for reducing nuclear weapons. The expansion of NATO to Russian borders, the conflict in the Ukraine, the sanctions that hurt the Russian economy in Obama's second term did more to destabilize relations. The Trump administration's ambivalence towards Russia is not seen in the way the U.S. is responding to Russia'a policy actions to expand its nuclear weapons capabilities.

Wall Street Journal Original article ›
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Nuclear arms control SALT treaties expire Feb 2026 - need for new negotiations as the treaties were obsolete, did not include China, smaller nuclear weapons, and weapons from space. The SALT arms limitation treaty was first signed in 1972 by Brezhnev with Nixon. These treaties went through a second version and were renewed. The US no longer thinks this is relevant as China is not included, and smaller nuclear weapons, ones from space are not included and new negotiations are the best way to conduct true arms limitation. An accompanying video in NYT by David Sanger goes into these aspects of talks. Rafael Gross, head of IEA International Atomic Agency, says- You wouldn’t negotiate the same treaty again. There are new technologies that are not covered by the treaty — hypersonic missiles, undersea nuclear weapons, space weapons. And there are many other countries that, for one reason or another, feel now as if they may need a nuclear arsenal of their own.” This is the reason. It also happens that in 2026 US and Russia could coordinate their efforts, so that new US weapons may be needed as other risks could emerge from other places. There are smaller nuclear powers and new nations that might develop nuclear weapons as the US nuclear umbrella may be seen as not fully dependable. This new thinking would be that US and Russia may not see themselves as adversaries but work together to prevent nuclear risks from other sources. This is also why the US (and Russia) may want to wind down smaller regional conflicts, reduce their reliance on their own alliances, so that nuclear cooperation between nuclear powers US, Russia, China, and India may lead to control of nuclear weapons in a larger sense from space and from smaller countries that might develop nuclear weapons as has happened in Iran, which might create new risks that cannot be managed. A belligerent North Korea could lead to South Korea and Japan developing a nuclear weapon. This is also why the Ukraine conflict has run its course and it is in no one's interest to let the Nordics or Britain continue the conflict. The US, Russia, China, India, Brazil should not let middle or smaller powers continue regional or historical conflicts, and promote settlement through peace talks of such conflicts, as it inevitably leads to damaging the interests of billions of people around the world in peaceful cooperation and tackling challenges that affect the quality of life. ...
Washington Post Original article ›
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....
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
U.S. Defense Secretary, Leon Panetta, held three way talks with Egypt's president, Mohamed Morsi and the head of the military, Hussein Tantawi. Panetta said of Morsi- " I was convinced that President Morsi is his own man." Panetta said Morsi is committed to democratic reforms and representing all Egyptians. President Morsi sent a letter to Israeli president Shimon Peres expressing deep thanks for a Ramadan greeting and expressing hope for new peace talks with the Palestinians. The U.S. preparations for a potential conflict with Iran and the civil war in Syria to oust the Assad regime have given new urgency to reduce tensions in Egypt between the different factions including the military.
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The WSJ's Laurence Norman talks to Yukiya Amano, head of the UN agency, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which has the responsibility of verification and inspection of Iran's nuclear development and facilities. Amano describes the issues raised by a 2011 report which outlined 12 sets of concerns to which Iran has to explain, a condition included in the final nuclear agreement. Iran has to respond by mid-August, IAEA then responds, and does work in Sept and Oct, and submits its report by Dec. 2015. Yamano says he has to fill in all the missing pieces in this jigsaw puzzle to get a full picture of Iran's nuclear development. Iran has denied access to military sites and Mr. Amano couldn't say if he has access to the Parchin military site. A concession that was made in the agreement is the long interval of three weeks before access to a particular site that arouses suspicions-the agreement gives Iran the right to appeal an IAEA request to visit such a site to a special commission. The U.S. and its European allies have a majority on the commission yet three weeks are allowed in which Iran could move material to some other location. For critics the question will be why such a concession was needed if Iran truly has decided not to develop nuclear weapons technologies. The U.S. president's response at a news conference on July 15, 2015, was that with the laws of physics the U.S. monitoring tools would detect nuclear activity at that site. The agreement also gives Iran an earlier than planned lifting of a ban on sales of arms and missiles and missile parts if the IAEA says Iran's nuclear activities are peaceful. Iran could conceivably wait till the ban is lifted and its economy in a much stronger position to withstand any future limited sanctions to pursue nuclear weapons development. This would have delayed development for a few years during which time the hope is that Iran has changed into a more peaceful nation pursuing economic development in its region, yet even if this is the case as as happened with India and Pakistan it could still pursue nuclear weapons development. The alternative is a status quo till a better agreement is reached with the leverage of tight economic sanctions and continuing dialogue during which time Iran continues to get closer to a nuclear weapon, or the use of force to prevent this. Iran added the arms embargo issue during the last weeks of the negotiation in June, a controversial move on Iran's part, as this may have complicated the picture with ballistic missiles technology exports to Iran approved after 8 years in the final agreement, compared to the agreement reached in April 2015 which made no mention of the lifting of the arms embargo. Iran played on the notion that if Zarif returned to Iran without an agreement hardliners including Khamanei would veto any agreement, yet this could just be the Iranian negotiating strategy. U.S. president Obama stated at the July 15, 2015 news conference that it would be hard to hold sanctions for longer. Critics might argue that China was already benefitting from the small easing of sanctions by increasing Iranian oil imports by 30% in 2014, and would have less incentive to withdraw from sanctions, as it is dependent on the U.S. and the EU, major markets for its exports and access to technologies. A WSJ/NBC poll in July shows almost half of the people polled in the U.S. saying they do not know enough to express an opinion, a steady 36% support an agreement, showing that the public has not been educated and taken along during the different steps in the largely secret negotiations....
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
China is building a port hub at Chancay that will have an initial 1.5 million TEU or twenty foot long containers capacity. It will be opened by president Xi in November. This megaport will cut the time it takes from South American coastline to Shanghai from 35 days to 25 days. Before this port China trade was conducted through Long Beach or Manzanillo in Mexico. China is now Brazil's largest trading partner and this port offers the possibility of connecting further from Brazil to Peru by land. This does pose new challenges such as crossing the Andes mountains and Brazilian jungle. The port will cost COSCO China's large shipping company $3.5 billion. China has invested in 100 foreign seaports with $30 billion over 2 decades. The port of Piraeus is operated by Chinese companies, and China has invested in a stake in the port of Hamburg, Germany which is the main gateway for Chinese exports into the EU. The US neglected Latin America and India during the three decades in which Reagan and Bush Sr, Bush Jr, engaged in wars in Iraq and Afghanistan wasting trillions of dollars, neglecting infrastructure investment in the US, and in Latin America and India. Over two decades the US has invested by comparison trillions of dollars in wars in Iraq starting with Reagan and Weinberger, Bush Sr. in the 1980's, and Bush junior in Afghanistan. Much of the oil dividend of the Middle East wasted by regimes in the region in wars. Not only the US infrastructure was starved of resources, Latin America, India and Indonesia did not receive the investment these countries needed for rapid development. Yet today Reagan and Bush are lauded for their contribution by Baker in WSJ today and by columnists in the NYT. The fall of the Berlin Wall was itself just an episode in the US relations with Russia as Russia and China are competing with the US. Germany itself of the Berlin Wall remains divided (with AfD popular in the East around Dresden), and Germany divided on pursuing policies that lead to worsening relations with Russia. Germany also maintains a strong trading relationship with China including a stake in Hamburg port given to China during the pandemic at a time when the supply chain over concentration in China was being questioned in US, EU, India. ...

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