LyrArc Article Gist
Heidelberg, in southern Germany, and smaller cities like Freiburg and Tubingen are seen as "green cities" in the sense that the people there have an open international outlook, are well educated, look at new ideas, and are idealistic. The Green party is in power in the southwestern state of Baden-Wurttemberg since 2011, where these three cities are located. Greens have about 20% support in elections here compared to 8% nationwide. Here Dr. Franziska Brantner, the representative in the Bundestag describes the orientation of people in the state. Heidelberg was able to handle the 600 refugees coming at the peak of the crisis very easily. Heidelberg's university, the oldest in Germany was founded in 1386. Students make up a quarter of the population of 156,000, and most of the Green party voters have university degrees, more than any other party according to Die Welt.

LyrArc Article Gist
Polls on Deutchland opinion trends show Merkel has gained support with her careful handling of Brexit, and the AfD has lost support. Only a month ago media reports covering the immigration issues had put AfD in the light of gaining using this issue. The infighting in the Conservative Party and the lack of any plans of ministers in the British government favoring Brexit for leaving the EU have Germans questioning this kind of politics compared to Merkel's promise of a "calm and composed manner" in dealing with issues of people's lives and the future of Europe. The extensive coverage in Germany of the vote for Brexit, the EU referendum in Britain, increased awareness in Germany of the benefits of the European Union. Merkel and other leaders offered their assessment of how the European Union has brought peace to Europe and improved the lives of the people during the pre Brexit media coverage. Now Infratest Dimap polls show the popularity of Merkel has increased to 59%. Compared to a June poll before Brexit things look better for Merkel-  the AfD Alternative for Germany has lost 3 percent of support dropping to 12 percent, the Christian Democrat party of Merkel is up by 2 percentage points to 34 percent in popular support, the Social Democrats also increasing support by 1 percent to 22 percent.The vast majority of people said the European Union provides security (74 percent) and prosperity (79 percent). Germans are skeptical about the value of referendums on such major decisions as EU membership because of swings in popular opinion such as that on immigration that swayed British voters- 49 percent saying parliament does better in these situations than a referendum, 42% saying referendums are better. For voters who said Germany was hindered by membership only 11% supported that proposition and 52% said the EU is beneficial for Germany. Over 75% actually favor more cooperation on refugees, data policies and energy, setting the prospect for a stronger European Union. Also proving the importance of responsible politics, and honest, flexible leadership, responding to people's concerns yet not pandering to swings in opinion for temporary advantage. A separate piece in the Guardian by Yonge points out that Cameron actually won only 23 percent of the eligible voters for Conservatives in the 2015 elections in Britain, reflecting a two decade slide. Brexit only made this failure widely visible, and did not escape the attention of the German people.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Alexis Tsipras of the Syriza Party stresses in his election campaign in September 2015 that even though he has accepted the Third Bailout Program from the EU, only Syriza will act so that the most vulnerable in society are protected. Tsipras openly accepts his mistakes and says he has learnt from his mistake of underestimating the resolve of the EU about its plans for the Greek economy. Syriza has also taken a sympathetic view of refugees and migrants coming to Greece. The Popular Unity Party and finance minister Varoufakis, a breakaway group from Syriza that advocates going back to the drachma, are not expected to do well in the election. New Democracy Party led by Meimarakis stresses in its campaign that Syriza is turning the recovery into an experiment and lacks the experience to implement the Third Bailout Program neogtiated withe the EU. Syriza and New Democracy are the leading parties in the election. It shows how much has changed in 2015, that the only two parties with some credibility are Syriza under Tsipras and New Democracy under Meimarakis, both having made errors but having the candour and courage to tell Greek voters that they have learned from their mistakes....

LyrArc Article Gist
Pop and Troinanovski look at the tough negotiations ahead for Brexit and describe Theresa May as a experienced negotiator. Belgian Interior Minister Jambon says she has "a lot of policy knowledge" and moved in the direction of European cooperation. Germany Interior Minister Hans-Peter Friedrich says May has a very clear idea of her objective, uses clear language, and is consistent. Yet much depends on other factors including elections in Germany and France in 2017. For France and Hollande the issue becomes particularly filled with implications with the need not to give the far right and Marie Le Pen any advantage by making concessions in the negotiations. German chancellor Merkel is also very clear from her perspective on migration and free movement in the European Union, a point on which she was tested by other Eastern European countries during the refugee crisis. Merkel made this clear that it was Britain's choice of direction in future relations- "Whoever wants free access to the European single market must in return accept all of the basic freedoms, including the free movement of people." Because of domestic politics in Germany and France and in the rest of the European Union, these negotiations could drag on for a very long time. The only positive sign for both sides is that May is known as a responsible politician after 6 years as Britain's Home Secretary, holding one of the top positions in the cabinet. As Merkel's popularity has recovered with about 55% popular support and the decline in the support for the AfD in recent poll cited by DW.com, Merkel may be prepared for a long negotiation to keep the original idea and spirit of the founders of the European Union alive and strong. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This exceptional report by Chulov in the Guardian shows the changes in the war in Iraq and Syria in 2015-2016 since the downing of a Russian jet by Turkey in late 2015. It says that the Syrian government's future was uncertain in late 2015 with Turkish support for rebel forces in the north. During this period Russia curtailed trade and tourism relations with Turkey, and improved relations with the Kurds. Russia intervened in northern Syria directly to prevent a collapse of Syrian government forces in the north. Kurdish forces were already controlling large parts of the Syrian territory adjoining Turkey, and Turkey was concerned about the support to Kurds within Turkey from Kurds in Syria and a historical movement for  Kurdish independence. In April 2016 Russia made a move to win Turkish support by saying it would support the territorial integrity of Syria, so that no support would be given to the Kurds. As the U.S. consistently supported the Kurds in the fight against ISIS, Turkey under prime minister Erdogan changed its policy of support for rebel forces in Syria to focus on what it perceived as the threat fom Kudish control of the region at its Syrian borders. Rebel forces were told to focus not on the Syrian government forces but on ISIS, leading to withdrawal of support in Aleppo. What remains now of the war in Syria and Iraq is Iranian influence in Iraq, the Russian influence from support of the Syrian government in Damascus, and for the first time U.S. ground forces in the north with 900 troops supported by artillery on the side of the Kurds. The next stage in the war to take ISIS controlled Raqqa is being negotiated between Russia, Turkey and the U.S., according to this report.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
In his foreign policy address following the northeast state primaries Donald Trump outlines a policy with less foreign engagement in trouble spots, and greater reliance on partners in Europe and Asia contributing to joint defense. It also includes building up the military and nuclear arsenal. It criticizes the Bush administration for intervention in Iraq that benefitted Iran, and the Obama administration for policies that led to the rise of Islamic State. Because Trump is not for supporting foreign engagements in trouble spots the difference in Trump's policies is not announcing or signalling in advance what U.S. response would be, instead keeping it unpredictable. It is not clear how much this would work given that any president would inherit the situation before him, and also the complexity of the situation would not change, such as the need to have Iranian cooperation and Saudi cooperation to tackle Islamic State. The Bush administration started with a similiar intention to focus on domestic policy, till the 9/11 surprise attack steered it away towards nationbuilding overseas. The pendulum swung in the latter years of the Bush adminstration to the Iraq intervention, Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo, followed by a swing in the other direction to allowing Libya and Syria disntegrate leading to millions of refugees. Complexity, surprises, and swings of popular opinion, are unlikely to go away, even as caution is exercized and military capabilities enhanced....

LyrArc Article Gist
This report in the WSJ provides details on the groundwork that was laid by the Trump administration as it worked to find a solution to the problems facing Venezuela with refugees and economic crisis, and months of protests. The plans were set in the days before Nicholas Maduro took office for the second term as president. The night before Juan Guaido, head of the National Assembly, declared himself president, U.S. vice president Mike Pence stated that the U.S. would support him if he took the reins of government from Maduro by invoking a clause in the Venezuelan Constitution that makes the head of the National Assembly take the office of president if the existing president is declared illegitimate taking office unlawfully. About 60 nations did not recognize the elections that gave Maduro a second term. On Jan 2 Mr Trump who feels deeply about the collapse of the Venezuelan economy and rising poverty, the suffering of the Venezuelan people, met with presidents of Brazil and Colombia. Colombian president Ivan Duque and Trump hinted at a plan to cooperate to help people fleeing Venezuela and respecting its democratic heritage. Mr Pompeo spoke to allies of the U.S. The National Assembly laid out its plans on Jan 15, for using a constitutional mechanism that allows the head of the Assembly to lead an interim government till new elections are held if the existing president is declared illegitimate. A leading Republican senator of Cuban origin Mr. Rubio supported the move. On the eve of protests in Venezuela Rubio and two other senators from Florida met Mr. Trump and Pence at the White House. Also present were Bolton, Pompeo, Ross and Treasury Secretary Mnuchin. Mr. Trump then decided to do it. He placed a call to Mr. Guiado  to tell him that if the National Assembly invoked Article 233 the U.S. president would back him.  The U.S. believes the rank and file in the military are with the opposition even though its leaders back Maduro. After the U.S. action, the governments of Brazil, Argentina, Chile, Peru, Colombia, backed the move for an interim government. The European Union called for free and credible elections. Russia and Mexico supported Maduro.  The State Department instructed the U.S. Federal Reserve about Guiado government as the sole representative for Venezuelan assets in banks. Sanctions could be placed on Venezuelan oil exports as backup efforts proceed to support the interim government. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
In this report WSJ looks at US Treasury Secretary's warning to China about its role in the free world and its position in the international trading system and the obligations to human values that come with it. Janet Yellen is so well known as head of the Federal Reserve and as US Treasury Secretary that it is easy to forget her experience at Yale studying under James Tobin who supported meeting social goals, whom she calls a life long mentor. Tobin set the foundations for economic policy in the Kennedy administration in the early post war period, after working in the Franklin Roosevelt administration during the war. Social goals, business paying its fair share of taxes, building infrastructure, were all a part of the FDR and Kennedy-Johnson administration.  It is also easy to forget that Yellen set the foundations for economic policy under Clinton and then under Obama administration the period when social goals were not met, infrastructure was neglected, globalization meant shipping jobs and factories overseas to China, and lack of financial oversight over banks that led to the 2009 financial crisis. The contradiction made Yellen realize only late during the Obama administration how much of a diversion she had taken from the social goals of the FDR-Truman-Kennedy post war period.  As one of the architects of the economic policy underpinning the emergence of China's role as the factory of the world, that destroyed many working class communities in the US, Yellen is in the economic role that Merkel shares in world of political economy with her integration of the German economy with that of China. Today as she calls for a retreat to the values shared by her mentor James T, Tobin and of FDR and Truman as they responded to the Berlin Crisis in the aftermath of 1945, and the Korean War with large scale invasion of South Korea and the kind of refugee crisis that we see today in Ukraine, there is much room for reflection. Reflection on what was lost in the intervening years of the Bush-Clinton and Obama years that led to the situation that the free world faces with totalitarianism today.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
India's Foreign Minister told a conference that China's forward deployments at Galwan in violation of 1993 and 1996 agreements was an attempt to change the Line of Actual Control. China after years of peaceful development under previous administrations, during which China had gained from the trade relationship with the US and foreign investment from the US business community, sought  to put India at a disadvantage using its larger economy and technological assets obtained through American business assistance. This was done by making forward deployments right at the Indian border to change the Line of Actual Control in progressive steps. Jaishankar made it very clear. "It is hard work, very patient work, but we are very clear on one point, which is we will not allow any unilateral attempt by China to change the status quo or alter the LAC. I do not care how long it takes, how many rounds we do, how hard we have to negotiate- this is something we are very clear of." Going back to the period of independence with Nehru in 1947- China's occupation of Tibet was an occupation of a peaceful country that led to the situation that India faces today of a border stretching from east to west on the Himalayas that faces China. Faced with the partition and refugees from that partition India under Nehru was not in a position to respond effectively to that occupation. Does China gain anything from being at that border through the occupation of Tibet is a serious question? Why? Because it faces a Vedanta and Buddha driven culture and people with population of 1.8 billion stretching to the Indonesian islands that were and still are the fundamental source of  China's own Buddhist culture and tradition.  US business has allied with one country after another Japan, China and now India. The US has faced wars with Japan, and sometimes in a failed attempt to understand the aspirations of  Southern Asia allied with British ideas of the region which were based on the policies of British Empire to divide the region on religious and language, caste based barriers. US business also lacked a true perception of the importance of working class and families in the US as it sent factories and surrendered its own manufacturing to China. The world is now changing following the pandemic and new supply chains and manufacturing policies of the US are being structured. It is in this context where India's pace of economic growth and technological advancement will change its capabilities and its capacity to meet the aspirations of 1.8 billion people in Asia with a common tradition and culture. It is in this context that one can ask the question does China have anything to gain from the occupation of Tibet and being on the border with a country and cultural tradition of 1.8 billion people stretching across South and South east Asia?  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Greg Mortenson runs 78 schools in remote poor areas of Afghanistan and Pakistan on a budget of $2.8 millioon he raises through small donations to his foundation, the Central Asia Institute. The Pentagon is listening to Mortenson and he has met privately with Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. THe military has specially sought him out. And General Petraeus has read his book Three Cups of Tea and passed it on to his staff for reading. He also has been asked to speak with senior officers of the Special Operations Command. Greg Mortenson believes getting amoderate education for these children is the best way to prevent the spread of Islamic extremism. In addition to the 78 schools he also runs 48 other schools in refugee camps in the region and 28,000 children in the 2 countries attend Mortenson's schools. In atalk to the Pentagon uniformed officers in 2002 he told them that the $840,000 spent on each of the Tomahawk cruise missiles fired into Afghanistan could have been used to build dozens of schools. He asked them which would you think will make us more secure? ...