LyrArc Article Gist
Nawaf Obaid, a fellow of the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at Harvard University's Kennedy School of Government, is also senior fellow at the King Faisal Center for Research and Islamic Studies. Here he describes the events leading to the Saudi turndown of a seat on the UN Security Council. The Saudi foreign policy establishment made this decision after several weeks of debate in Jeddah considering the U.S. and Russia's effort to make only a muted criticism of the use of chemical weapons in Syria in the Security Council; and the U.S. effort to have the British, French and Saudis give up on demands for firm language in a Security Council resolution on action to be taken against the use of chemical weapons. For the Saudis, says Obaid, better not taking a temporary seat on the UN Security Council, than to be left a docile member without its own voice and the voice of others in the international community being heard. Obaid also points out that this is the beginning of Saudi effort to exercize its own influence in the Middle East, as it faces three separate developments in 2013- the Iranian rapprochement with the West under new president Rouhani, the Arab Awakening and the new consciousness in the Middle East, the U.S. policy under president Obama of not taking leadership in the Middle East. This also comes as the Saudis parted ways with the Obama administration on the role of the military in Egypt, and has differences with Turkey and Quatar on support for Islamic groups in Egypt and Syria....

LyrArc Article Gist
President Obama in his speech at Georgetown, April 13, 2009, describes the thinking behind the decisions made in the first 12 weeks of his administration- why the actions are not aggressive and overreaching as some critics say, and why they are not timid as other critics have said. This was not a typical downturn of the business cycle, but a perfect storm arising from irresponsibility and poor decisionmaking in Washington, Wall Street and Main Street- in effect several crises colliding for something like an explosion, if not dealt with at once, and with strong action. He says "the key to dealing with our deficit and debt is to get a handle on out-of-control health care costs, not to stand idly by as the economy goes into free fall." The recognition that the crisis itself brings with it new possibilities, the opportunity for coming to grips with and forging a good solution to health care, energy and education issues that were neglected while Wall Street directed investments to areas other than investment in building for the future. To the critics like Krugman, Rosenfeld and others who say that the takeover of insolvent banks should be done quickly before the situation worsens, he says it is not because of any ideological or political judgement he has made about government involvement in banks, but because it is more likely to undermine than create confidence at this point. He goes on step by step, through the process of decisionmaking, first to step in and boost spending vigorously, second to get lending flowing again to businesses and families, strengthening the non-bank credit market for consumer purchases and loans, the housing plan, the auto plan, and the work at the G-20. Then President Obama goes on to project his vision and the road to getting there. The five pillars he sees for the future are: redirecting Wall Street and banking to constructive investments for the future, investments in education, investments in renewable energy and technology to create new industries and new jobs, investments in health care to cut costs for businesses and families, and new savings in the federal budget to bring down the deficit. Obama says he will look for savings line by line in every corner of the budget, and has already identified two trillion dollars in deficit reductions over the next decade. And the goal is to reduce discretionary spending for domestic programs as share of the economy by more than 10% over the next decade. Procurement reform will greatly reduce no-bid contracts and save $40 billion. Secretary Gates is attacking th problem of hundreds of billions of dollars in waste and cost overruns that have bloated the defense budget, without adding to the nation's safety. And education programs that don't work will be removed, and waste, fraud and abuse in the Medicare program will be controlled. Finally, Mr Obama points to the nation's political system as one more reason we are in this perfect storm- "a fundamental weakness in our political system." He cites the putting off hard decisions for another day, scoring political points instead of rolling up up sleeves to solve real problems, an impatience that is only worsened by the 24 hour news cycle, and a short attention span that focusses on the immediate results and on poll numbers. And there is too much responding to the "tempest of the moment until the furor has died away and the media coverage has moved on, instead of confronting the major challenges that will shape our future in a sustained and focussed way." After these 12 weeks President Obama says, for the first time there are glimmers of hope, and way off in the distance can be seen a vision of America's future that is far different than its troubled past. And citing the parable in the Sermon on the Mount about that "house built on a rock", he sees America's house built on a rock, a house for which we use this moment to lay a new foundation, come together and begin the hard work of rebuilding, persisting and persevering in the face of disappointments and setbacks that surely lie ahead. Then he has no doubt "that this house will stand and the dreams of our founders will live on in our time." Its a remarkable speech in its directness, its simplicity in approaching the subject, and its borrowing from the Bible for that story of that house built on a rock, and its Lincolnesque reference to the house that will stand. And more than a speech, it describes a vision, and the set of actions and steps taken and to be taken to get there. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Tax cuts initiated by the Bush administration and to a smaller degree by the Obama administration account for $6.3 trillon of the $10 trillion deficit in 2011. This is about half the $12.7 trillion gap between the $2.3 trillion surplus predicted by the CBO a decade ago for the year 2011 and the current deficit of $10.4 trillon. Two wars and higher defense spending add another $2 trillion. The Stimulus added $700 billon. The Prescription Drug Benefit for seniors $272 billion. This is based on new analysis of CBO data by the Pew Fiscal Analysis Initiative. The record shows unrestrained spending by both parties has led to the current mess. Pete Domenici who chaired the Senate Budget Committee at the time of the first tax cuts in 2001 says "in the end the floodgates were opened." This also shows how quickly the situation can change if sound fiscal practices are abandoned. Two wars were financed entirely with borrowed money for the first time in U.S. history.

LyrArc Article Gist
During the early weeks of the Libyan people's struggle the Wall Street Journal was one of the rare voices that stood up for freedom in Libya, saying the U.S. had to have the will and was not so overstretched that it could make a difference working with its allies in NATO. It took some time for the Obama administration to make up its mind by which time the Gaddafi forces would have entered Benghazi. It was the leadership of Sarkozy of France and Cameron of Britain that made the decisive difference at the right time. And as the tide turned it was the young people of Libya who could be seen in the video footage who showed bravery against the organized heavily armed forces of the Gaddafi regime. The lesson from the U.S. support for the Libyan people's movement for democratic government is that the U.S. can make a moral difference and a strategic difference when it follows the right instincts that have guided the country since its founding.

LyrArc Article Gist
Karen Eliott House was a former publisher of the WSJ. Now with WSJ in Murdoch's News Corporation's hands, she is a fellow at Harvard's Belfer Center. Here she points to the diverging situation between the USA and Saudi Arabia. She thinks the US cannot protect the Saudi monarchy (which dates back to Abdul Aziz and his support from President Roosevelt first by recognition of the new state of Saudi Arabia in 1932 and support during the war), from its domestic challenges. One of these domestic challenges is changing demographics as the young or people below 15 years age make up 40% of the population, rising unemployment, and pressures for modernization which the monarchy has done little to respond to, and the lack of democratic forms which would give people a chance to vent their feelings. For the U.S. the frustration is that the Saudis have done little or can do little for the USA in the way of moderating oil prices as they move still higher, because of speculative trends, decline of production in its own maturing oil fields, and needs to finance huge new plants and cities to provide employment to a growing population. In fact Libyan oil officials has been more of a moderating influence recently than the Saudi oil officials. So it appears that what Karen is saying is that the Saudis are pursuing their own interests in their region and the wider region that includes South Asia and Northern Africa, and the US is pursuing its own interests, which at this time are not as clearly defined, except securing oil supplies and protecting Israel. The 2 countries USA and Saudi Arabia are going their diverging and different ways in a way that is irreversible....

LyrArc Article Gist
Sabotage of two tankers in the Persian Gulf and reports of activity of Iranian proxy forces in Iraq and Syria have led to an American response with the dispatch of a aircraft carrier and other forces to the region.  This report in the NYT says Defense Secretary Shanahan has prepared plans for deployment of American forces in the region with one plan calling for 120,000 troops to be dispatched to the region. As president Trump is against American involvement in land wars in distant places, the force is designed as a precaution in case of an Iranian attack through proxy forces in Syria or Iraq and not for a land operation. National Security Adviser Bolton has taken a strong position on Iran since the days of the Bush administration. The U.S. withdrawal from the Iran nuclear deal, the sanctions on Iranian oil, are part of a new policy of the Trump administration. The European Union countries have followed a policy of preserving the nuclear deal of 2015, even though the U.S. is pressuring EU countries. The oil sanction have led to a sharp drop in oil exports and is hurting the Iranian economy. President Rouhani of Iran says Iran may withdraw from parts of the Iran nuclear deal and the Iranian response is leading to heightened tensions in the region.  It was only recently that the Democratic party Obama administration pursued the Iranian nuclear deal with opposition from Republicans in Congress and skepticism of Israel. The election of president Trump who says the deal was a bad one has reversed U.S. policy leading to a complete change in policy and a possible confrontation with Iran. U.S. policy can veer back and forth depending on the party or president in power who completely different perceptions of the region. Obama had sharp difference with Israel and Saudi Arabia, and a different perception of Iran. Trump and Bolton see Iran as a threat to the U.S. After Iran shipped most of its nuclear fuel out of the country in 2016 in exchange for lifting of economic sanctions under president Obama's nuclear deal it would take over a year for new uranium enrichment facilities to produce the materials for a nuclear bomb, according to this report in the NYT. When the Obama administration negotiated with Iran the window had shrunk to a few months.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Robert Stavins of the environmental economics program at Harvard is cited in this NYT article by Coral Davenport. Stavin says that even with the change in policy favoring fossil under Trump administration the trend is towards using less fossil fuel and this trend is unlikely to change. This makes the claims of Trump that half a million jobs can be created with less regulation of the coal industry and shale oil industry, less likely. Industry is shifting away from coal for economic reasons and investors preferences, say experts. At the same time the progress away from fossil fuels is likely to be inadequate to avoid the worst effects of global warming, says Stavins. The change by industry is reflected in the decisions made by executives such as Nicholas Akins at American Electric Power, Ohio based electric power company. Akins tells NYT that he is making decisions for power generation 20, 30 and 40 years from now, and this assumes some form of carbon control. He says no question but that industry will move forward with cleaner energy and that means closing large coal facilities. The incoming Trump administration does not affect his policy. Another factor away from coal is dictated by economics- the availability of cheap natural gas from hydraulic fracturing. Incentives for renewable sources such as wind, solar, are not likely to change either say experts, because the solar panels and wind turbines are made in Republican and Democratic favoring districts and have support of Republicans in places like Arizona, Texas and Kansas. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Senate Foreign Relations Committee chairman's view of Afghnistan differs significantly from New York Times correspondent Filkins understanding from years of reporting going back about a decade. Filkins sees the complexities of Pastun country inside Afghnistan and Pakistan and the military and ISI's involvement, and other correspondents have pointed to the narcotics trade and corruption. Kerry's simplistic view is that the Taliban do not enjoy much support, when actually Americans are seen on the ground as foreign occupiers. These correspondents in the field point to this as an everpresent danger, which would tilt support to those fighting foreigners, with nationalist and Muslim sentiment prevailing over everything else. And Kerry appears to be too willing to dismiss allegations of narcotics involvement of the Karzai administration with the "show me" comment. For critics of the Bush administration this is simply astounding, when so much is at stake. Does patient mean digging in one's heels slowly? But that is how the Vietnam intervention ran into trouble, without public sentiment in support of the plans....

LyrArc Article Gist
Daniel Henninger of the WSJ says the state of opinion that asks does it matter, about the terrorist attack on Benghazi, is misplaced. He watched the movie "13 Hours" on what happened at Benghazi, and says a terrorist group had made plans to attack the American consulate, the depiction in the movie fairly accurate, and the Obama White House version with the 2012 election in two months not accurate. Henninger cites the indictment by a federal grand jury in the District of Columbia of Abu Khatallah. In June 2014 Khatalla was captured by Special Forces for the attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi. The indictment says Khatallah and militias "launched a violent attack on the U.S. mission on Sept. 11, at 11.15 pm.." following this up with an attack on the CIA annex.

LyrArc Article Gist
The U.S. and Japan sign a new security agreement in 2015 which removes a geographical constraint on Japan participating in joint action with the U.S. in protecting vital global interests. The agreement is called the Joint Defense Guidelines. The agreement will enable Japan's Defense Forces with the permission of its parliament to participate in such action. Earlier agreements limited action to the defense of Japanese territories. A new alliance coordination mechanism will be established with officials from diplomatic, defense and military departments of the two countries. Consultations between the U.S. and Japan will take place through this mechanism in peacetime and in emergency situations. The new guidelines also include joint development of weapons systems and sharing of military technology, and cooperation on cybersecurity, missile defense, reconaissance activity. Japan's reinterpretation of its Constitution will now be discussed in parliament in the context of this agreement, to clarify what other activities Japan can take on....

LyrArc Article Gist
Criticism of Rumsfeld and Cheney from the elder president Bush about the presidency of his son George Bush, and the belligerent tone struck by Rumsfeld and Cheney during that period.

LyrArc Article Gist
Hilsenrath describes how the Federal Reserve missed the signs of the mortgage financial crisis of 2008, the bubble economy, and how low interest rates and other actions of the Fed to rescue the economy led to a situation which hurt savers. The lack of a serious plan for homeowner rescue as part of the actions by the government further hurt the working and middle class. The rescue also lacked credibility because the banks ended up becoming bigger than they were, and no action was taken in the U.S. which had been pushed by the U.S. in similiar situations overseas- for example on South Korean banks for overborrowing during the 1997 Asian financial crisis.  At the 2014 Boston Fed sponsored conference on Inequality, Fed chairman Janet Yellen described what she called the largest inequality in the U.S. not seen since the 19th century. The average net worth of the lower half of the distribution, said Yellen, of 62 million households, was $11,000, and a quarter of them had zero net worth. These were the shocking statistics that propelled two unlikely outsiders forward- Donald Trump to the Republican nomination for president, and Bernie Sanders who coming close to getting the Democratic nomination settled for a big part of setting the Democratic agenda supported by nominee Clinton in 2016. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
With the strong positions taken by Clinton and Trump on China in the 2016 election campaign, U.S. relations with China enter a new phase. The strident tone in the campaign on China on trade deficit, women's issues, human rights, comes with the issues relating to China's role in the South China Sea and cyber espionage already in the background.

LyrArc Article Gist
The Economist points out (in this cover issue on India-Pakistan relations) several fundamental facts. The first is that the current state of relations betweeen India and Pakistan hurts Pakistan the most. It makes a much smaller country and smaller economy bear the burden of defense against a large neighbor- defense takes up much needed allocation of funds for infrastructure and development, education and healthcare. It also weakens democratic institutions and their development by an overdependence on the military for governance. Poor India-Pakistan relations have significant adverse effects on the U.S. In fighting the Taliban U.S. forces are fighting a force that Pakistan's military helped create and support from its early beginnings as a way to counter Indian influence. With an Indian-Pakistani peace settlement of issues in Kashmir and other outstanding issues the U.S. would be in a significantly better position to disengage from the region, especially when the entire Middle East is moving in a new direction in 2011. Consider the difficulties in establishing peace in Northern Ireland, and between Turkey and Greece, and the difficulties of establishing peace between India and Pakistan cannot be considered even more difficult. Pakistan and India muddle along- neither side is doing much to take the initiative. For the U.S. disengagement from South Asia can be best achieved by pushing for a settlement between the two countries. Pakistan and India have much to gain from a settlement. Considering the progress made in Ireland, such places as Yugoslavia, and in Turkish-Greek relations, there is a lot more that can be done and should be done to bring India and Pakistan together. In Ireland diplomatic efforts were made by U.S. envoy George Mitchell, and in Yugoslavia U.S. envoy Holbrooke made diplomatic efforts towards the Dayton accords. Greek-Turkish relations have advanced to the point where Erdogan and Papandreou, the Greek and Turkish prime ministers, discuss solutions to the Greek debt crisis. This includes options to reduce Greece's defense expenditures in the light of Turkey's new foreign policies. The lack of such efforts to break the deadlock between India and Pakistan by the U.S,. the U.K. and other countries involved in the NATO mission in Afghanistan, the emphasis on a military solution supported first by Gen. McChrystal, and then by by Gen. Petraeus, all show a lack of understanding of the real issues that need to be tackled- issues relating to a peace settlement between India and Pakistan....

LyrArc Article Gist
Report from the ground giving an unbiased account by a captain in the army who served tours in Iraq and Afghanistan. He spent 7 months as aspecial advisor to the NATO director of communications. He avoide the official tours through the countryside and tried to see and hear what ordinatry Afghans were saying. He says the outbursts against the corruption in the Karzai government reveal a level of distrust that is so great that it greatly diminishes the credibility of the American effort in Afgahnistan, and increases the difficulties of the mission there. He suggests ombudsmens committees to handle complaints of corruption, and the withholding of funds to districts and government agencies that do not meet transpanrency and accountability goals.