LyrArc Article Gist
This response by experts on transatlantic relations rejects the other view expressed in Zeit Online that the U.S. under Trump remains estranged from Germany and the EU. These experts from the American Institute for German Contemporary Studies, American German Council, and Centers at John Hopkins and Georgetown for German Studies, reject the view that the Trump administration and Germany are that far apart on many issues as it appears from media coverage.  Foremost it points out that civil society relations are sound and growing. About 50 million Americans trace their descent to Germany, including president Trump, much larger to over half the U.S. population considering European descent. Much larger is the sense of a culturally shared future with the European Union, with the nations of Europe including Germany, France, Italy, Spain, the nations of Eastern Europe, and Britain. The civil society relationships run deep in a way that is hardly affected by the Trump administration. Within the Trump administration the policies to Europe these experts remind the reader, are determined by the "adults" in the administration, who are senior members of the administration. This is a crucial point as Trump administration policy is not determined by the president's liking for tweets as much as by senior cabinet members Tillerson at the State Department, Gen. Mattis at Defense, Kelly at the White House, and senior members of Congress including Senators Corker and other senior committee members. This is why Republican Senator Kay Hutchinson was chosen as Ambassador to NATO. It should be noted in this context of German-EU relations in president Trump's first year that there was a period of German disillusionment with president Obama, exacerbated by the NSA spying on German chancellor Merkel and on the EU delegation to the UN, with president Obama's failure to offer any apology. Relations recovered from that low point. No one suggested that there be a German led decoupling of the EU with America at that low point, or at another low point in German-U.S. relations with the setup of American Pershing II nuclear missiles on German soil under the Reagan administration when there were large scale protests.  The American view that the U.S. should not have to shoulder major responsibilities for defense and foreign relations by itself is not new say these experts, and goes back to earlier administrations before Trump.  The experts argue for an active role by Germany with its partners in Europe for defense and foreign relations, which should not be seen as a result of U.S. pressure, only responding to the situation as it has evolved upto this time. Views on immigration are also changing with effort by the EU and Germany, France, to reduce immigration from the source countries in Africa, and the changing perceptions about uncontrolled immigration in Germany and France, say the authors. A coordinated policy towards Russia  is seen as not having changed. And much as a reset in relations was advocated by Obama in the first year of his first term, the current policy of the Trump administration to work with Russia to lower tensions can be seen in the same way say these experts, and not as a fundamental shift in American policy. The deep relationship of Germany and the EU with China is another positive aspect that will also help the U.S. in framing its own policies towards China. The German-American relationship, and the European Union relationship with the U.S.  is seen as basic to the values and interests of the U.S. and Europe. This relationship is too deep and supported by civil society and Congress, the Republican Party, and the Democratic Party, by large trade relationships, to be affected by temporary differences under any one administration. Even these differences are part of a larger debate that is part of dialogue on issues in a democratic society, sometimes raucous and loud, and could be welcomed and carefully channelled in constructive ways.     ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Joseph Stiglitz writes that keeping the dollar as the reserve currency is no longer the option. He tells us that it comes with some hidden costs such as a weaker global economy. Having developing countries keep hundreds of billions of dollars in the US in low interest earning reserves makes no sense considering the needs of developing countries, and the improved prospects for the USA and Europe in exports to a growing developing country economies. He points out that a new global reserve currency, with an orderly transition, may be the most important reform to ensure the longterm health of the world's economy. Its bad for the USA to keep exporting T-bills, says Stiglitz, as it does not create jobs. And its bad for all concerned as it lowers global economic growth. Especially he says when it is so unseemly for developing countries not to use the money to improve living standards in their own countries, with the help of exports from developed countries, that in the end improves global growth and the global future....

LyrArc Article Gist
It is not clear how China's president Jinping's support for the idea of "China Dream," -of China as a world power on a level with the U.S.- should be interpreted. China will increase its defense budget and continue its efforts to be the dominant power in its region, even as the U.S. and Japan begin to build closer ties in the Pacific. Is it simply a new assertiveness for its rights in relation to territorial disputes with Japan, and a continuation of a policy of peaceful development of earlier leaders. The move could also be an effort to build close ties with the military as the new leadership of Jinping-Keqiang prepares to make major changes in the economy. A speech in Dec. 2012 to Communist party officials in Guangdong province by Jinping, on how the lack of unity with the military led to the collapse of the Soviet Union under Gorbachev, could throw light on the thinking. In a few days an old party was gone, as he put it. This also follows the Bo Xilai episode which involved contacts with the military and the risks of division in the military and political leadership....

LyrArc Article Gist
China's new foreign policy team under the Jinping-Keqiang administration. Foreign minister Yang Jiechi, becomes state councilor, and senior official on the team. The new foreign minister Wang Yi, was China's ambassador to Japan 2004-2007. The new ambassador to the U.S. is Cui Tiankai, a diplomat who graduated from the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies in the U.S. Cui was ambassador to Japan 2007-2009. Managing the China-Japan and China-U.S. relationships is critical for China because China depends on U.S. and Japanese companies for investment and new technology, for continued economic progress. The relationship has been affected by the territorial disputes with Japan in the East China Sea. Germany as an advanced technology manufacturer and commodity exporters Australia, Canada, Argentina and Brazil depend on the Chinese market for exports, creating an interwoven economic dynamic that is likely to be the dominant factor in relations. This is also the perception of Li Keqiang who told a press conference in Beijing that the competition with the U.S. has been overemphasized, that he "does not believe conflicts between great powers are inevitable." Foreign affairs remains subordinate to domestic policy and priorities in China, as China tackles the problem of reorienting its economy to give an important place to the private sector and consumers. Itself not an easy task, as prime minister Keqiang pointed out at his first press conference: "Talking the talk is not as good as walking the walk." One of Keqiang's main allies in this effort is Robert Zoellick, former president of the World Bank, who helped put together with China's DRC, the report "China: 2030," outlining these priorities....

LyrArc Article Gist
The recent appointment of fast food executive Andrew Puzder as Labor Secretary has caused great concern among union leaders. Puzder supports a $9 minimum wage compared to $15 supported by Democrats. Unions now represent 7% of the labor force, down from a high of 20% during Reagan's time when Reagan appointed a construction company executive as Labor Secretary and cut regulations.  Globalization has thinned the ranks of workers in unions. And the failure of Democratic administrations to stem the shift of factories overseas to China, Mexico and other places, as part of global supply chains focussed on cost, has weakened Democratic support among workers since the period of Bill Clinton. It eroded to the point where Obama won 65% of support among unions and Hillary Clinton won 56% in 2016. Interestingly the Republican Romney gained 33% versus 37% for Trump, showing voters were more inclined to move away from Democrats and only a smaller number willing to support Republicans, but the shift enough to give Republicans a win in 2016 for the presidency. The figures are from a Election Day survey of trade union AFL-CIO, and a larger proportion in midwestern states showed disaffection with policies from Clinton to Obama. In fact Obama spent years promoting another free trade agreement TPP that favored tech more than auto and older industries, just as Bill Clinton had promoted NAFTA, without giving thought to what this was doing to its worker base of support. A similar situation happened with Social Democrats in Germany as a SPD administration moved to the centre and handed Christian Democrats led by Merkel a win in parliamentary elections. As Democrats such as former Labor Secretary Reich, a professor at UC Berkeley who served under Bill Clinton, describe the problems of working class people their is less reflection on the impact of the changes from globalization and how Democrats handled or mishandled it, and more on the politics between the two parties.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Hillary Clinton narrowly loses the Michigan primary to Bernie Sanders in March 2016, as the Sanders campaign focusses on Clinton's support for trade agreements that hurt American workers and lead to loss of manufacturing jobs. About three fifths of voters in the Michigan primary considered this a major issue. Many less educated younger workers see their job prospects diminish and wages drop with free trade that hurts American manufacturing jobs. Bill Clinton signed the NAFTA agreement with Mexico, and as a member of the Obama administration Clinton supported the Trans Pacific Trade Agreement, later opposing TPP when she left the cabinet. Sentiment against trade that hurts manufacturing jobs in the U.S. is strongest in midwestern states such as Michigan, Ohio and Illinois. This was also a major issue benefitting the Liberals under Justin Trudeau who won in Canada's industrial Ontario province which has suffered hollowing out and loss of manufacturing jobs under the Conservative Harper administration. In the U.S. the issue goes back to the Clinton Administration for two decades. New jobs created by Apple, Google, and other tech companies pale in comparison with the industrial jobs created in another era that benefitted working class families. This issue and high unemployment or under employment, lower wages for working class families, was a major issue in the 2016 U.S. presidential election campaign. Widening wealth disparities, and lack of upward mobility, high tution and healthcare costs for ordinary families, dominated the campaign in the U.S....

LyrArc Article Gist
Japan's GDP declined by 3.5% in the third quarter of 2012. GDP is expected to decline in the fourth quarter putting Japan in a recessionary phase. The rebound effects following the tsunami and earhtquake are receding and sales to China are sluggish. The strong yen and the eurozone crisis hurts exports. The proposed sales tax increase by the Noda government may be jeopardized by the recessionary phase.

LyrArc Article Gist
Actually some of this is a healthy development as more nations and people have a stake in the world economy. Take the Brazil situation for example . Clearly the Brazilian people are more favorable to globalization and its benefits than they were a decade ago at the height of the Asian crisis and the contagion effect on Brazil. Actually the advantages of free trade and a global trading system that benefits Brazil as well as China and India and other countries that buy its commodities such as iron ore is more now than ever because these nationas are benefitting from this trade. Because of the high prices of commodities and the agricultural products of Brazil, it has a currrent account surplus and its currency is strengthening. Instead of having to go to the IMF for assistance Brazil has large foreign exchange reserves that support its currency and which help it push up its investments as a share of GDP from 19% to closer to 25%, which should enable it to sustain about 5% growth year after year., according to Sergio Vale of MB Associados. A strong real, lower interest rates, and consumer credit have boosted the purchasing power of the middle class and the antipoverty programs of the Lula government have helped the poorer classes have a stake in the development. According to a recent Observador/Ipsos survey 23 million Brazilians have left social classes D and E and joined class C whose distinctive markings are a rented apartment, a car and some new gadgets. Actually quite to the contrary of the impression created by this article Brazil according to a former central bank governor is now showing a new enthusiasm for this kind of development which encompasses free trade and markets, a feeling that the stockmarket is not a casino and being part of the world economy is a good thing. The big discoveries of oil at Tupi and Carioca-Sugar Loaf in Atlantic offshore waters by Petrobras even though they are in miles deep waters and require special expertise must only have reinforced this mood. The danger to Brazil's enthusiasm comes not from nationalism of different countries trying to find better ways of meeting the aspirations of their people but from the risks in a global slowdown that started with the US subprime and mortgage crisis, the resulting credit tightening, and fall in consumption thats expected after years of overspending by the American consumer. Its now upto these individual countries, like Brazil, China, India and Russia, Japan as well as Germany France and other countries that are not directly part of the housing bubble and subprime and mortgage securitization mess affecting the USA, and the UK and Ireland and Spain to a lesser extent, to find ways of maintaining more modest but still substantial growth to meet the growing aspirations of people in these countries. In this sense the policy errors and regulatory errors made during this last decade in the US will actually have hurt the world economy and markets in a serious manner, and it is this that has now to be managed in a better way by these countries with the close cooperation between them and the USA. The situation in Brazil is repeated in the experience of India, China and Russia where for the first time there is enthusiasm for being part of the world economy. In the light of this development there is more reason for hope and more need for careful navigation mechanisms for these and other countries to weather the difficulties from a global slowdown and still sustain development that itself could help the USA work its way out of the current crisis through its exports....

LyrArc Article Gist
Security is at the heart of India's foreign policy. S. Jaishankar points this out at Thiruvanathapuram. He says this was true of the effort at Balakot and even in the midst of Covid at the Line of Actual Control with China when India sent up enormous numbers of troops to defend the border. This is also behind the stand with China that security and LAC comes first in all relations with China. Trade and exchanges all come in the context of LAC, settle the LAC issues first then we can proceed with better bilateral relations, this is what India is telling China.  There are good reasons for this. India has a large border in the most formidable terrain of the Himalayas which is also close to the plains of India in the LAC with China. Any difficulties at the border would weaken India's secuerity and weaken development efforts in the same way that Japan sought to weaken Chinese development through invasion in the 1930's. Tibet looms out of the past. When China invaded Tibet Nehru's couple of pages in Discovery of India on China show that he had no idea of the China that had emerged with Mao and the CCP in its historical struggle against Japanese nationalists and imperialists. He had an idea of China that came from the Buddhist period and India's links from the past. The ruthless Japanese invasion that China confronted on its soil, and British colonial incursions before that, had already transformed the China of the past, which now under Mao in 1948 may have sought more defensible borders by extending them to Tibet as a buffer state. Historically the British had never tolerated Russian or other European or Japanese interference in the border states such as Tibet. There was also the question of capacity. By the time of the invasion of Tibet in the early 1950's China had already fought the Korean War with the US. India's army and defense forces were just coming out of partition and ill equipped for the task of defending the borders in Tibet region. Current governments in a more normal setting cannot change this part of history, yet can take full recognition of the facts that this has created. A strong defense has to be created for defending a border that extends for thousand of miles now that China has unlawfully occupied Tibet. On it also depends a strong and vigorous development effort that helps build the kind of modern defenses as the economy grows and absorbs new technologies rapidly. Both defense and development go together, one cannot have defense without rapid modernization and development, and one cannot have rapid modernization and development without defense. A weak defense would lead to distractions in development leading to the lack of rapid modernization and development as the intruding power interferes in insidious ways in the internal and external links of the country. This is the lesson of colonial interference of western powers in Asia. As Brendan Simms shows in his new book, Europe - Struggle for Supremacy 1500 to the Present, it is also the lesson of a different kind of colonialism inside Europe since 1500, where weaker states inside Europe fell behind with interference in turns by the imperial powers of France, UK, Austria-Hungary, Prussia and Russia. Poland, Finland, Czech Republic in the past and even Ukraine today are just some examples of what can happen when one loses sight of this principle. Poland and the Polish Commonwealth in the 19th century, Hungary right down to 1956, and China in the 1910-1930, India in the 18th and 19th century were weakened internally even after recognizing the problem, so that recognition of the problem is not an adequate condition to prevent countries from facing such foreign interference. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Rattner looks with alarm at recent figures showing that of 2.65 million jobs created in the U.S. in 2015, only 30,000 were in manufacturing. He reflects on growth in manufacturing with the recovery in automobile manufacturing between 2009- 2013 - during this period employment in the U.S. auto industry went up by 23 percent to 690,000, and employment in Mexico's auto industry went up by 60 percent to 589,000, showing much faster growth overseas. Manufacturing has also experienced decline in private sector wages of 0.8% since 2009, with auto industry wages down 12.7 percent, says Rattner.

LyrArc Article Gist
A Peterson Institute of International Economics study on the TPP trade agreement shows it would reduce growth in the U.S. manufacturing sector by a fifth, according to this report in the NYT. Workers incomes and job losses in manufacturing are a key concern for voters and account for the surge in polls for Trump and Sanders in the U.S. presidential election of 2016. All four leading candidates Clinton, Sanders, Trump and Cruz oppose the TPP agreement. Congress will wait till after the election to decide. This is a big issue today because about 5 million jobs have been lost in 1977-2014, according to the Alliance for American Manufacturing. The Peterson study predicts job losses of 50,000 a year, yet another study by Tufts University predicts job losses of 450,000 a year. Another study by the Economic Policy Institute study shows other damaging effects such as labor's share of national income declining from the TPP.

LyrArc Article Gist
For every 10 yen change in the exchange rate, profits of exporters are likely to increase by 7-10%, according to Goldman Sachs. This includes companies such as Toyota, Sharp, Panasonic, Sony and Asahi Group Holdings.

LyrArc Article Gist
The Journal's Jeff Bennett talks with Rodney O'Neal, the CEO of Delphi Automotive. O'Neal says Delphi's success depends on focussing on advanced technologies where emerging market producers are less able to compete. He has focussed on 33 product lines which are 'green,' safe' and connected.' If it doen't create value then revenue and cost numbers are wrong, is O'Neal's lesson from the bankruptcy filing. He likes the chaotic discussion coming form strong debate, where views are expressed with passion and counterpoints made, and he takes this debate seriously, because as he sees it choosing the right course is a significant task in itself, which takes much time to correct if wrong. There are major improvements in emission and fuel economy ahead and a high tech future for the automobile industry. He see America's future in high-tech where America can do better than emerging market producers, and ensuring that the steady flow of exceptional American talent continues to be channelled properly....

LyrArc Article Gist
In this WSJ report a top American Defense Department official before resigning says- "I have no problem with feeding China or trading with China. I have a problem with arming China." Advanced or sensitive manufacturing technology is still being approved for export to China says this report in WSJ, even as the US perceives this to be a national security threat. Experts say the Commerce Department report approval process needs overhaul and the US needs close coordination with the European Union on this process. Of the total US $124 billion in exports to China in 2020 only half of one percent needed a license Commerce Department data reviewed by WSJ shows. Of that small fraction of one half percent Commerce Department approved 2562  applications or 94%. This even includes array of semiconductors, aerospace components, artificial intelligence technologies that could be added to China's military. This means that even towards the end of the Trump administration with its talk about national security threats, through the four years 2016-2020, nothing much happened in this important field.  The difficulty that the Trump administration faced and America faces is putting company and business interests first or American security interests and retaining competitive technological advantage interests first. American administrations and business have consistently failed to follow what plain ordinary Americans understand by America first. Even when it is clearly evident that America is handing over sensitive advanced technologies with very little in return, and creating out of nowhere competition that poses serious risks for the national interest, business and administrations operate indifferent to the national interest. Even right into the period when this is making the world a riskier and more dangerous place.   This is the state of affairs today, and the situation is not about Congressmen visiting Taiwan or ships going through the seas in that region, or international law. All that is American policy  and is well known and well understood. What is missing is the right action and the right determination behind other action that is sending a different message at the same time -that the US is oblivious to its own interests. That administrations, even those such as the recent Republican one under Mr. Trump, see a higher priority in following American business wherever it goes in pursuit of individual company interests alone, even if it does not accord with the national interest. Lobbying groups distort what policy should be in the public interest and in the interest of both countries, leading to a breakdown in the whole process itself whenever governments surrender their role of protecting the public interest.  Outshoring manufacturing was bad economically at the level of communities across the US, leading to divisions that weakened the country in the last decade, it was also bad for the economy of the country with loss of the best manufacturing jobs, beyond what economists in their ignorance of the big picture sought to show was the consumer- often the same person who lost a job or stopped seeking work- paying less. It was bad also for China as it created the hyper growth that rapidly contaminated land, air and water and created an inherently unstable relationship in trade with destruction of jobs at a pace that America had not faced with Japan and with which it could not cope. Could a pace that worked for both nations have worked? At the root is the notion that business knows best even if it is in plain sight to every plain American that the country's most advanced technologies are being shipped out. Governments do not fulfill their responsibilities and fail when they fail to tell business what rules are in the public interest, as it was never in the first role of business to protect the public interest. That the European Union has simply followed the US in this has created a problem for both the US and the European Union of deviating from what plain Americans or Europeans see as abundantly clear.  Even in plain dollars and cents business and economists fail to grasp the true cost for the whole country or whole people compared to the benefit for an individual or an individual company. The cost of wars even small wars can be be trillions of dollars which are borne by the whole country or people, and most of it by the middle and less economically well off classes in a country. Creating a belligerent competitor in world affairs and the risk of conflict and war is to lose trillions of dollars when the benefit to an individual, groups, or individual companies is no more but a tiny fraction of that trillion dollar cost, not including what all the plain people pay in human lives. It is not that anyone benefits as the people in the belligerent competitor country follow the same pattern of loss that would happen in the US. One should ask is it not a loss for China also? The example of Imperialist Japan is not so far off in time for Americans or Asians including the Chinese and Japanese people who suffered so greatly to forget. Business remains oblivious to the public interest not just for America but for the world, individual companies do not see it as their role beyond that of pursuing individual company interest. Is it not then for the government to set the rules. Is it alright for government to not fulfill its responsibilities? Even when this pushes the world faster to into conflicts as technologies take the place of exercise of wisdom in conflict, and even when there are unmet challenges such as climate change that affect the whole planet.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The limited options the US has to get China to appreciate the value of its currency, the yuan. Some of the options depend on getting the IMF or the WTO to prod the Chinese, others depend on a Plaza type Accord.