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
Most of the problems in Eastern Europe follow from overborrowing by the privae sector , consumers and corporate borrowing, in foreign currencies. According to David Roche of Independent Strategy, private sector foreign currency debt rose to 126% of foreign exchange reserves between 2002 and 2007. Roche is former head of research and global strategy at Morgan Stanley. As a result he says, 50% of household debt is in foreign currency in Hungary, 30-40% in Poland and Romania, and over 70% in the Baltic states. The debt in lowcost foreign currencies like Swiss Frances, Euros, and even yen, also expanded in the corporate sector. BY mid 2008 non-financial corporate debt in foreign currencies reached over 45% of corporate laibilities in Bulgaria, over 30% in Ukraine and Baltics, and over 20% in Hungary and Russia. To get an idea of the way the foreign subsidiaries of major western european banks expanded their lending, note that lending to homeowners between 2002 and 2007 doubled each year in Romania, rose 60-80% in the Baltics and Bulgaria, rose 20-30% in Poland and Hungary. And lending to corporations grew 20-30% a year. There is aclear suggestio of reckless lending and reckless borrowing in these numbers just as was seen in the way mortgage lending ocurred in the USA. The history of this kind of lending goes back to the reckless lending in Latin America in the eighties that led to lost decades many years before, and is a recurring story. Now Roche sees loss of GDP of 5%-6% for Turkey, Russia, Romania, Czech Republic and Poland, and 8-10% in Hungary, Bulgaria and the Baltic states. That would take 40% of foreign exchange reserves in Turkey,Czech Republic, Poland, Hungary and Ukraine. And this will have a human cost in jobs lost, crime, poverty, and years of progress lost in these countries. And it will ricochet back to the parent companies of the European banks that did a lot of this lending, with $130 billion additional losses, and a loss of 10% of tier one capital (equity capital plus disclosed reserves) of Western European banks....
NATO Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The Soviet threat actually receded after 1964 when Brezhnev became head of Soviet Union till 1982. During that period in the 1960's till today the face of NATO as today was from a series of heads of governments of Dutch Stikker in mid 1960's or other small European states such as Norway Stoltenberg and Rutte Netherlands again in 2025. It could be said that none of these leaders  of small EU countries represented US interests- or even European interests- a point the DJT administration is trying to make. First NATO head UK's Hastings Ismay's NATO for "keeping the Russians out, the Americans in and the Germans down" is more British Imperial policy of 1904 -1940's as the Indian Viceroy's Assistant, not US policy or in America's or even Europe's interest in 2025. It hurt the US in Venezuela as Russia propped up a regime which led to millions of refugees entering the US illegally. And it hurt Europe as Russia propped up the Syrian regime with millions of refugees entering Germany and destabilizing its political structure. Going back if a new defense institution was set up to replace NATO by the Europeans in 1970's this would have been the right step which would have not led to Russia propping up regimes in the Americas or the Middle East. A goal that is being discussed with Russia by the DJT administration to refocus American efforts in a new direction and pause not just the Ukraine war but also put the US  and Russia in a new direction with the new competition from 3 billion people in China and India changing everything we know about the world. ...
dw.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The concerns over far right parties expelling immigrants in states such as Thuringia has caused a wave of protests across Germany including Berlin and other cities in January 2024. It is also impacting the East where anti immigrant sentiment is based. Germany has a shortage of workers in parts of Germany that formed the Federal Republic before reunification- immigrants fill these gaps. The East has not been the success story it was supposed to be because reunification of the Federal Republic and the GDR (Communist East Germany around Leipzig and East Berlin) led to a flight of young people to the western parts for jobs and opportunities. Leading to a mostly older and retired population in the east -leaving it struggling and feeling unwanted. This is the background of the anti immigrant sentiment in the east where there are far fewer immigrants than in the western and central regions. Resentment about being ignored as settled around the immigrant issue in the east even as Germany has benefitted through some of the middle class educated immigrants from Turkey and from Ukraine, and Syria. Similar resentment has taken place in parts of England in the north which led to fear of immigrants being used by Tories party leading to Brexit. In a similar way in France in the north, and in the US with neglect of rural areas and factory communities in the east and midwest. The communities that were left out that have made choices with far right as in Britain have ended up with leaders from immigrant families that have accomplished little or much in the reverse direction for the English people in the north. The leaders of Germany, Britain, the US, the Nordic countries such as Denmark, and gradually in France have learned that it is right to go back to their roots, that they had forgotten where they came from and are now fighting for the dignity of workers (Schulz), standing in picket lines for the autoworkers (Biden), and following the Biden example in the UK (Starmer). With it comes the realization that this started with the Thatcher and Reagan era that created the conditions and culture that were repeatedly embraced by Democrats in the US, Labor in Britain and Social Democrats in Germany alike leading to financial crises and levels of inequality and lack of educational opportunity not seen since the Great Depression. With it by 2024 comes the unwinding of the economics and culture of the Reagan era. Even in China and India the shift is away from that culture as the economies of these countries with half of humanity are shifted to serve a broad base and to include rural, agricultural and other parts of the population. It shows that the educated parts of the population in these countries have the ability to create the conditions that in Lincoln's words are for the people, by the people, of the people, for a brighter future, if only they will try hard enough for their children's and grand children's sake.  ...
POLITICO Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The Labour leader and prime minister of Britain met Donald Trump during a trip to speak at the UN General Assembly in New York on September 26, 2024 Starmer has misgivings that Trump may withhold support for the United Nations and its framework for maintaining peace in the world, and tackling issues of development and climate change. Britain's leader Starmer told the UN General Assembly- "People talk about an age of polarization, impunity, instability and an unraveling of the U.N. charter. And I feel a sense of fatalism has taken hold.” “But our task is to say no … This is the moment to reassert fundamental principles and our willingness to defend them. To recommit to the U.N., to internationalism, to the rule of law.” With Macron's shaky coalition government in France, and a coalition government in Germany with less popular Greens, FDP and Social Democrats, Russia engaged in a conflict with NATO in Ukraine, Starmer speaks for Europe at an important time to recommit to the UN Charter and uphold the principles of the UN for the betterment of mankind. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This report in the WSJ  shows that president Xi is pulling back from his signature economic policy to reduce wide gaps in wealth and opportunities in China. In 2021 this was a policy that Xi pushed to reduce inequalities that have built up over decades of hypergrowth. One tenth of the population owns 68% of the wealth in China creating an highly unequal society. Concerned about the future of the Communist party as disparities kept widening and 40% of the population was left behind, Xi early on in his first and second terms made tackling corruption and inequality part of his policy.  Yet the way China's economy is structured, its dependence on the construction industry for growth, and on local governments for investment, it is easier to tackle infrastructure projects than address widening gaps in society. Xi's efforts have led to slowdown in growth to 5% or less. With the US and Europe moving to shorter supply chains and moving supply chains to less integration with China, slowing growth to less than 4-5% presents a major challenge for China. Leading to a pull back from the Common Prosperity policies that Xi initiated and which are part of Communist party policy in its early period after 1949. A major problem for China says WSJ is that social security contributions revenue is 6.5% of GDP compared to 9% for advanced countries in the OECD, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. Personal income taxes are 1.2% of GDP compared to 10% in UK and US. This prevents the better funding of programs for maintaining a better safety net and social support for the less well off in society. The pandemic followed by Ukraine war have added new urgency to the acceleration of the effort to build new supply chains, leading to new manufacturing innovation and manufacturing leadership in the US and European Union, and in countries such as Japan, India, and other parts of Asia. This too has made the goals of reducing inequalities and addressing the wide disparities in Chinese society more difficult with sharply slowing growth in China. This was also the experience of Japan and South Korea with decades of fast growth followed by sharp slowdown with unanticipated problems. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
After years of negotiations Russia and China reached agreement on a memorandum that provides deliveries by Gazprom of 38 billion cubic metres of natural gas to China by 2018, under a 30 year supply deal. The pipeline to deliver gas to China is part of a $50 billion project for a pipeline that takes gas to Vladivostock for liquefaction. A spur from that pipeline would take gas to China. This would make China the largest importer of natural gas from Russia. In 2012 Germany imported 33 billion cubic metres of natural gas from Russia, followed by other large importers Ukraine, Turkey, Belarus and Italy. A new agreement between China and Russia's state owned oil company, Rosneft, doubles the oil imports to 31 million metric tons a year under a 25 year deal. The current level of imports is 15 million tons set by a deal in 2009. The lower price of natural gas going to Europe helped the two countries bridge differences over price. China's National Petroleum Corporation will partner with Rosneft for exploration in new oil fields in the Russian Arctic region....
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The settlement price of wheat per bushel (60 pounds) is $6.13  August 18 at Chicago Board of Trade compared to $7.58 at the start of 2022 before the Ukraine war started. Russia's bumper crop and its ability to continue exporting is one reason. Higher commodity prices also mean producers plant more. This is good news for the cost of living not just in poor countries but also in the US and Europe. Peter Coy looks at the dynamics of wheat pricing and production.

WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
NATO was formed in the days of the Truman administration on 25th July 1949, following the Berlin Blockade, the coup in Czechoslovakia by Soviets, and the efforts to set up pro soviet governments in Turkey and Greece. It accomplished its purpose by pushing back against the Soviet effort securing democracy in Greece and Turkey in the 1950's. Much of this was achieved under Heads of NATO from the US- Gen. Eisenhower, Gen. Ridgway, Gen. Guenther and Gern Norstad proteges of Ike all from West Point by 1964, when Brezhnev was new head of Soviet Union and by 1991 Warsaw Pact of Soviets setup in 1955 was dissolved yet NATO was not. The US interests shifted to Asia - Gen MacArthur leading a UN effort in Korea and the US leading its own effort in Vietnam in the 1960's. The Soviet threat actually receded after 1964 when Brezhnev became head of Soviet Union till 1982. During that period in the 1970's till today the face of NATO as today was from a series of heads of governments of Dutch Stikker in 1970's or other small European states such as Norway Stoltenberg and Rutte Netherlands again in 2025. It could be said that none of these leaders  of small EU countries represented US interests- or even European interests- a point the DJT administration is trying to make. It hurt the US in Venezuela as Russia propped up a regime which led to millions of refugees entering the US illegally. And it hurt Europe as Russia propped up the Syrian regime with millions of refugees entering Germany and destabilizing its political structure. Going back if a new defense institution was set up to replace NATO by the Europeans in 1970's this would have been the right step which would have not led to Russia propping up regimes in the Americas or the Middle East. A goal that is being discussed with Russia by the DJT administration to refocus American efforts in a new direction and pause not just the Ukraine war but also put the US  and Russia in a new direction with the new competition from 3 billion people in China and India. WSJ Editorial Board takes the British position on the Ukraine peace proposals with centuries old skeptical attitude on Russia's intentions. The US government position put forward by DJT is that there are constructive discussions with Russia, and the need to settle the underlying issues behind the conflict. This includes NATO's future. NATO setup in 1949 for Soviets,  on the borders of Russia in 2025 after the end of the Cold War when its rival the Warsaw Pact set up in 1955 of the Soviets was disbanded in 1991. The British position comes from centuries of conflict in Europe and its interests in protecting its Empire till the 1950's remaining unchanged, and cannot reflect American interests in the 21st century as its economy competes with China and India and the EU, and seeks to do this by keeping former colonial powers out of the Americas including Russia, and China.   ...
The Guardian Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
In his farewell speech Boris Johnson, with true British resilient spirit,  says "I will be giving fervent support to Liz Truss and her government every step of the way." Johnson likened his transfer of power to Ms Truss to a relay race. "The baton will be handed over," saying it "unexpectedly turned into a relay race, they changed the rules halfway through." But he expressed no feelings of regret, having come to terms with the arrangement in his own way. More likely Johnson is without saying it still determining the policies and direction of the government, perhaps more so now with Liz Truss and his loyalists the only persons in the cabinet and running the British government. Johnson addressed people's fears about the energy price increases- "the UK would continue to have the strength to give people cash they need to get through this energy crisis that is caused by Putin's vicious war."  He listed his government's achievements- the response to Covid. Some of this is forgotten as the UK not the EU leadership was first to move forward with vaccination plans. Johnson put his government's faith in the vaccine invented at Oxford University and committed early while the EU languished under Merkel and her protege Ursula Von der Leyen. The EU fell behind in providing vaccine leadership as Britain forged ahead early, giving hope to the rest of the world's population including India that adopted the Oxford vaccine. Johnson likened his role to the missions to the planets- "Let me say I am now like one of those booster rockets that has fulfilled its function and I will be re-entering the atmosphere and splashing down invisibly into some remote and obscure corner of the Pacific." Johnson has taken the situation in a truly British way without any rancor and gracefully. With Liz Truss in charge he even gets a break after the difficult period handling the once in a century pandemic, handing over to a younger member of his group, and yet deciding on many of the policies and guiding the government for the term it was elected for to 2024. History will look at him favorably for his handling of the pandemic and vaccination, and for his instincts about the Ukraine war and Britain's unwavering support, and now in guiding Truss to provide Britain with strong support for the cost of living crisis caused by the war. His failings stem partly from his exuberance and optimistic spirit, but nowhere near detract from these achievements. ...
The Hindu Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Chinese views on the India war of 1962 are shown at the Beijing Military Museum in a display effort "One Hundred Questions on the China-India Border Self-Defense Counterattack."  China's PLA on its 95th anniversary looks at the 33 day war and calls it a "counterattack." It also says China withdrew because its goals were accomplished of getting back the territory it lost since August 1959 to India, that on the Indian side "the decision making was in the hands of civilian officials who did not understand the military at all," and called it "chaotic." It also brings up the international situation that Russia supported both China and India in the conflict and India had the US on its side. It says PLA withdrew because of the difficulty of supplying the military in the Arunachal region at a great distance from China particularly after the famine that resulted from the Great Leap Forward. Today there is a clear chain of command and joint work by the Indian Air force and the Army, infrastructure to support mountain operations being built at rapid speed, and building of modern defense manufacturing capabilities for the airforce and army as shown at the Defense Expo in Gandhinagar, Gujarat, this week.  One of the first aspects of the border that one sees in the region is how close it is to large population cities and towns in India and how remote it is from large population towns and cities in China. In this sense China after the experience with Russian conflict before 1900, later a large Japanese invasion in 1931and 1937 appears to have responded to its period of semi-colonialism with an aggressive policy of extending its frontiers to regions that were throughout history acting as large buffers between India and China- such being the case of Tibet which was occupied in the 1950's leading to the war with India and a border dispute that had never existed before in history. Other aspects today are that in 1962 the PLA had fought the war against the Japanese and the war agains the Americans in Korea all within a 20 year period. In 2022 China has focused for 50 years on modernizing its economy. The supply chain in the Ukraine war showed shortcomings in the Russian army, and the difficulties of supplying forces at great distances. There is also the question of morale when it is about  miles of icy terrain at heights over 10,000 feet, thousands of miles away from major population cities and towns in China- for reasons of Russian and Japanese semicolonialism behaviour not to be found in regions that had never seen large armies in history such as Tibet or Arunachal or the Himalayan border regions. The distances tell much of the story- the distance from Shanghai, Shenzen or Beijing, to Tibet is over 4000 kilometers and the border region with India additional thousands of kilometers over some of the most rugged terrain on earth with only remote mountain communities existing in the most difficult environments.       ...
DW.COM Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This piece in DW.com is critical of Merkel and Macron, leaders of Germany and France, following the Russian invasion of Ukraine on Feb. 24, 2022. It says the West - European and American leaders bear partial responsibility for the developments in Ukraine.  Another view that also is critical of the western leaders says that NATO's role needed to be redefined, Russia's role in security cooperation in Europe needed to be defined not in the old terms of European history but in a new way so that NATO did not become a new form of shifting Eastern Europe into the opposite of what it had become under the Soviet Union. The western leaders of the last 20 years never addressed these issues and allowed them to be decided by default by different countries in Eastern Europe, just as they engaged in small lengthy wars in remote corners of the world - in Afghanistan to Iraq. From Reagan to Bush Sr and Bush Jr, from Clinton to Obama, from Kohl to Merkel and Schroeder these leaders never addressed the basic underlying issues creating the situation that is faced today. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This WSJ editorial board opinion lists all the reasons for continuing the war in Ukraine without answering the question raised by Lt. Gen. Keith Kellogg about- what US interest calls for losing an entire generation of Ukrainians and Russians young men to war? The US as a beacon of hope in the world requires asking this question. Kellogg is a 80 year old veteran who has seen hand to hand combat in Vietnam and survived, attended the US Army College in Kansas, and has decades of experience in the Army, and was National Security Adviser. The US should ask questions about what is its right role? NATO was started in 1949 against the wall coming up in Eastern Europe under Communism, the Warsaw Pact was formed to oppose NATO in 1955. Yet after the Warsaw Pact was  disbanded by July 1991 after the fall of Communism there was no effort to reassess forming a new architecture that is based on the new situation. Shouldn't NATO have been replaced after Warsaw Pact was no longer in existence? Russia was too weak in the 1990's and till 2010 and there was no one to make the case for a new defense architecture. And no effort to reconsider and see that there is no fallback to positions from the Cold War and before that to British Empire positions about protecting its dominions in India and Asia from Russia. Considering that Russia is the only major nuclear power other than US in 2025, and within the years of a pandemic that destroyed an entire generation of older people- American, Russian, Chinese and Indian.   ...
The Guardian Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
“My absolute priority will be to strengthen Europe as quickly as possible so that, step by step, we can really achieve independence from the USA." European perceptions of recent happenings in the Ukraine war and the war's progression from the beginnings over three years will matter in 2025 as Europe, as Germany, France and Britain take on the role of bringing a fair peace to Europe that closes the war and does the reconstituting of defense architecture of Europe under new institutions that needed to be taken up in the 1990's after the fall of the Berlin Wall. Republicans and DJT's perception of Europe as 27 states is likely to be false. Germany and France in the 21st century may just be stepping into a role that was prepared since the formation of the European community in the 1950's with Germany and France at the core of Europe. It may surprise many that Europe just steps into this role. And with it a reconstituting of the defense architecture of Europe that needed to be done after the fall of the Berlin Wall and not left to the vagaries of free market capitalism that have created the present situation. “It was not a spontaneous reaction to interventions by Zelenskyy, but obviously a manufactured escalation,” Merz of Germany has said recently of recent White House happenings.  “My absolute priority will be to strengthen Europe as quickly as possible so that, step by step, we can really achieve independence from the USA,” Germany's Merz says and means it even if it confounds the US, China and other nations. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Jens Stoltenberg, Secretary General of NATO, says European nations are spending 2% of their combined GDP on defense spending in 2024. There are variations between EU and NATO members yet Europeans are already at 2% of combined GDP on defense spending. There is more defense spending that is happening beyond the 2% as the Ukraine war continues into 2024. Stoltenberg also said two thirds of this defense spending is going to US manufacturers and for manufacturing in the US as there was great demand for  American made Himars rocket launchers, Patriot missile systems, and for F35 jet fighters. The statements that the Europeans are not taking their defense seriously and that American jobs and American factories as part of defense infrastructure rebuilding are not part of the story no longer hold true.

NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Why is this important? Because America needs a future and investing in the future meets investing in new technologies and investing in infrastructure, and in mitigating cost of living for families that are struggling. Mr. Trump's claims on cost of living, oil and gas production, and job losses from electric cars at a rally in Texas and fact check: Oil and gas production is 12.9 million barrels a day compared to 12.3 million barrels a day during the Trump administration- source: Energy Information Administration. Energy costs are up a lot by $2250. (Mr. Trump said). Energy costs per household up $1520 not $2250 according to Bureau of Labor Statistics. $1520 compares 2022 with 2019 as baseline, $2250 uses Jan 2021 as a baseline when energy use dropped because of the pandemic. The Ukraine war and taking Russian supplies off the market pushed oil prices higher which were mitigated by policies of the Biden administration on how shipping of oil takes place in international markets setting a lower price for oil than what the Russians and Saudis were expecting. Autoworkers won't have jobs in 3 years because everything is going electric. (Mr. Trump said).It takes fewer workers to produce electric cars than fossil fuel cars. Yet the world is moving to electric cars and even companies like Toyota that lagged are falling behind. The 146,000 workers at GM and Ford secured a 25% wage increase over several years to meet rising cost of living with the support of president Biden on the picket line. No jobs are expected to be lost in 3 years and America is gaining leadership in electric car technologies to build a healthy automobile industry and well paying jobs for the future.     ...
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The shooting of former deputy prime minister Boris Nemtsov, a leader of the opposition in Russia, in Red Square, Moscow, on Feb. 28, 2015.
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This story in the WSJ on the Biden White House says it always operated with a tight inner circle. During the Covid pandemic it limited contacts for the president, yet after the pandemic eased this protective layer was not taken down says WSJ. As the president's age advanced the tight inner circe remained sheltering the president form the outside. The debate with DJT was one point that this became evident. Biden in his last year in office is 82 years- the oldest president. He had accomplished much in passing the series of bills that funded infrastructure, chips, science and protecting workers using his skills with Congress acquired over span of 50 years. Limiting Biden's one on one's and to certain parts of the day had an unexpected result. The head of Armed Services Democrat Rep. Adam Smith says this happened during the 2021 withdrawal from Afghanistan. He could not reach Biden so he could caution him about an overly optimistic view of the withdrawal. As the withdrawal led to loss of 13 armed forces men the disarray was a topic for Republicans. Only after the withdrawal issues Biden called Smith. In 4 years Smith says he had this one call with the president when he had spoken to Obama several times. Simtih's view is that Biden White House was "more insulated than most." Senator Manchin says he had less contact with Biden than his closest advisers.  This WSJ report also says the contacts of cabinet members with Biden were limited and tightly controlled. This report says Yellen at Treasury had few one one's with the president and dealt with adviers. Austin at Defense in the last 2 years during the Ukraine and Gaza crisis had only rare direct contact with Biden. During the campaign this story says close adviser Donilon kept access limited for polling experts to the president to the point where Senator Schumer and others felt Biden was falling behind but the president was not aware of this. ...
Wilson Center Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Anton Harder in this Wilson Center publication of research uses correspondence between Jawaharlal Nehru and his sister Vijaylakshmi Pandit ambassador to the US in 1950, to show that the US made an offer for India to take a permanent seat at the UN Security Council. India had supported two resolutions on June 25, and June 27, first condemning the invasion by North Korea and second the organizing of a UN force of 29 countries to push back the North Korean invasion. Even though the US is not seen as actively engaging with India during that period and seeing through British eyes the colonial policies of encouraging  different powers in South Asia, that may not be true.  Who was India's foreign minister in 1950? Jawaharlal Nehru was both prime minister and foreign minister till 1964, which means there was less discussion of foreign policy than happens today during the Ukraine invasion with Jaishankar a career diplomat with 30 years experience, Rajnath Singh, and Mr. Modi, in talks with president Biden recently, and in further discussions Modi had with EU's Von der Leyen and UK's Boris Johnson, Kishida of Japan. Who was India's defense minister in 1950? Baldev Singh, a Sikh independence struggle leader was Minister of Defense for 1947-52 and tackled partition of Punjab and Kashmir issues. The rest of the years to 1957 when India faced the Chinese invasion of Tibet India's defense minister was also for most of the period Mr. Nehru, except Ayynagar in 1953, and Kailash Katju in 1955 and 1956. The controversial V.K. Krishna Menon was Defense Minister from 1957 to 1962, when Indian defenses were further neglected leading to the Chinese invasion of India in 1962, and his replacement by Yashwantrao Chavan. The purpose of this is to look back at what happened in earlier periods to understand where India stands today- and what choices it makes today. Clearly the US was looking for allies then and now. Nehru saw things from his own reading of history seeing China and India as both suffering from western invasion, not realizing that China's experience under Mao was different- that of Japanese invasion and bombing of China's major cities not just colonization of Hong Kong and other ports for trade under British trade based policies in 1850-1900. Thus a Communist Chinese version of China's defense involved taking over border regions such as Tibet putting China in direct and open opposition to India. Nehru never really grasped what was happening in Tibet and the war China fought against the Nationalists. American general Stilwell loved China deeply and had an understanding of its people as shown in Tuchman's account in her book Stilwell and the American Experience in China 1911-1945. Stilwell during that war had a better understanding of China, the strengths and weaknesses of Mao's China and of the Nationalists under Chiang, than Nehru. Some of these errors post 1950's and a concentration of foreign, defense and embassy positions in the person of Mr. Nehru and of Nehru family member such as Mrs. Pandit led to the Indian failure to act on Tibet and see it as see it for what it was -facing a Communist Mao led China that had fought the Japanese invasion as different from Bodhidharma's China of the history books. Bodhidharma's China will outlast Mao's China, yet it is Mao's China that India faces today. This also tells us that India has to think in new ways- as Lincoln said during a period when America was also making its own progress as an industrial nation in the 1860's. "The dogmas of the quiet past are not adequate to the stormy present. The occasion is piled high with difficulty, and we must rise to the occasion. As our case is new, we must think anew, we must act anew. We must disenthrall ourselves, and we shall save our country." India's values are values of democracy heightened not just by Mohandas Gandhi's ideas with Hind Swaraj written in 1910 just as powerful in 2022, but also by the heights of Ladakh where elections are held in remote regions of the Himalayas. India's values are values that are also shared in the best that America has in its values and culture and in the defense of freedom.    ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
The Times of India Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Without the patience and skills of S. Jaishankar peace at the Indian border with China could not have been restored in 2022. Here he describes the challenge of border incursions when he still called on his counterpart Wang Yi and maintained friendly communications, asking Yi not to let China complicate matters so that solutions could be found and things did not deteriorate further. At the time of tense Ukraine dispute in Europe, Jaishankar who was earlier the Indian ambassador to China, navigated this period of tension with China using his knowledge of China and how best to continue the diplomatic communications.  Less well known is the work put in by Jaishakar to bring citizen to citizen contact between Indians and Chinese by setting up such intercultural and educational programs in several Chinese cities as Ambassador to India. Jaishankar had the foresight to know that this would be important for the future. Yet these contacts are only a small fraction of the potential contacts between India and China on a citizen to citizen direct basis that are needed. Never is that more true than today with the wars in Europe, and the need for peaceful development in Asia. China is still a middle income country and India modernizing to become a middle income country. Both Europe and the US are far ahead in development than China and India. Jaishankar was appointed the Foreign Secretary of India in 2015 and in 2019 Foreign Minister of India in the Modi administration. He was the longest serving Ambassador to China for about 5 years in 2009-2013. He is unique because of his having been a senior diplomat to China, Japan, Singapore and the US, and speaks Japanese and Chinese. ...
DW.COM Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
German perceptions of Mikhail Gorbachev are shown here in DW.com. He is revered in Germany because of Gorbachev's efforts to end Soviet rule in East German state called the GDR, leading to the fall of the Berlin Wall. Gorbachev supported German reunification but did not do this is in a way that ensured that ordinary Russians and citizens of the GDR could make the transition to democratic processes in a smooth way. He also failed to grasp that economic transition could be difficult and would require extensive aid and grants from the west, and that safeguards and protections for retired pensioners and vulnerable sections of society needed to be in place. The following is a reflection of the background in political government and economy of the events in Europe leading to the war in Ukraine.  As a result Gorbachev's instincts were right by first 1956 as a student, and then 1979 as government official about the need for democratic processes to realize the real potential of Russia, just as has happened in many countries that lacked these processes for change in government- Japan, Germany, South Korea, India, Brazil and many countries in Asia and Latin America. But not realizing that these countries made the transition with considerable American and British assistance. Even where there was no direct assistance indirectly the British setup the first limited Swaraj or free rule in India, with elections and elected assemblies in Indian states in the 1930's, following the pattern in Dominion states Australia and Canada. Mohandas Gandhi negotiated within these processes for rights of South African Indians and Colored people, gaining experience, including study of British law.  A son of poor farmers in the agricultural region of North Caucasus, in Stavropol, it is relevant today that his maternal grand parents were from Chernihiv in Ukraine. He came to power in 1980 after entering the Politburo that year. These were the waning years of Leonid Brezhnev, president of the Soviet Union who followed Nikita Khrushchev (1953- 1964). Khrushchev was from eastern Ukrainian region near Donetsk. Leonid Brezhnev was a protege of Krushchev since 1931, from Kamianske, Ukraine.   Gorbachev was influenced by Khrushchev's speech that denounced Stalin in 1956 in favor of a freer and more open society. Khrushchev, became first secretary of the Communist party in 1953 after the death of Stalin and set the pace of post war Soviet society from 1950 to 1964. He removed the fear of the dictatorship of the proleteriat working class, increasingly dictatorial under Lenin, and blatantly arbitrary under his successor to make Soviet Union a freer society.  Yet his tendency to make decisions on his own without consulting others, and the failure of agriculture in the Soviet Union including food shortages led to his replacement by his protege Brezhnev. Brezhnev's whole career was built under Krushchev in Ukraine, in the army in Ukraine, and as a political leader in the Soviet 18th Army that entered Prague in 1945 defeating the Nazis. Why is this relevant? Gorbachev was educated at Moscow State University when the Soviet Union was in the Sputnik era, and felt at the time that it could reach the 1950's standard of living in the US- very different from the earlier leaders. Yet he may have been too much of an optimist and not hands on in understanding the working of a modern economy as large as Russia and the interests of different groups of society that had to be be balanced and protected. His understanding of the US and of how the US and British economies had evolved was limited or nonexistent. The isolation of the Soviet period may have compounded this. The Russian state in the Soviet Union could not simply unwind the power of the state and its intervention and everything would come out right of its own accord.   Leonid Brezhnev, the Ukrainian Russian who succeeded Krushchev from 1964 to 1979 let the system of Soviet rule remain as it was, in the Great Stagnation, leading to lethargy, lack of innovation, and a weak economy with military expansion. Gorbachev tried to regenerate the system by opening it up, but failed to see that there was a risk that it could come apart quickly as it did in just 4 years after he became president in 1985. Only the centralized power of the state had kept the Russian state together from the Tsarist period through the Communist period. The risks of this Gorbachev failed to grasp. What if it happened too quickly without a safety net for the people who could not make the transition. What lawlessness and failure of the rule of law could happen. The US and Britain had evolved their democracies over centuries. Wars were fought in the US and Britain over rights and responsibilities of kings and parliaments. In the US Lincoln fought the civil war not just for emancipation but to ensure safeguards for free white men on the farms so that Labor did not get disabilities placed on them by Capital (entrenched forces of Capital of which the southern plantation economy was only one aspect.)  Japan and Germany were set up as democratic states through American power and constitutional frameworks with Marshall Plans or agreement to take in unlimited imports from Japan. This bad scenario happened in Russia because Gorbachev failed to set the conditions first and work patiently to achieve them including introducing limited  elections and parliamentary processes first in Russia.  Leaders such as Yeltsin who succeeded Gorbachev in 1989, winning the elections that followed, failed to provide a safety net for the vulnerable in the 1980's. Unemployment increased rapidly, life expectancy dropped in Russia, and the economy failed in the early years after 1980. A Marshall Plan like that offered to Germany could have helped but Gorbachev's failure may have been his failure to provide this transition by arranging for West Germany and the US to support a planned transition, a kind of Marshall Plan of Aid, and maintaining a gradual move to democracy as the country was given time to learn institutions of American and British parliamentary democracy. No such Marshall Plan was negotiated for a smooth transition over inevitable obstacles, no safeguards were put in place for illegal efforts to control the state by rogue elements and to seize assets of state companies, no efforts to first introduce limited elections and parliamentary processes for learning democratic process in Russia, and the people of Russia were left with a memory of the this period as a bad lawless period from 1989 to 2005.  Leading to the situation today under Putin of aspiring to the Soviet period as a kind of period that had offered Russia the world recognition it had lost. And this had happened even though the Russian economy had recovered and the standard of living had risen under Putin. Putin's career spanned the period as a Russian official in Dresden, Germany Democratic Republic or Soviet period East Germany to working in the St Petersburg City Council under Yeltsin. He personally witnessed the fall of the Berlin Wall and the fall of the German Democratic Republic from Dresden and Gorbachev's refusal to build a transition period for the changes so that it would not be traumatic for the GDR. Even after reunification these traumas remain in some segments of the older population in East Germany that saw themselves as neglected and support extreme right wing parties in eastern German states by 2020- considering the Soviet period as one in which their lives were less neglected.  After three terms as president Putin with his own traumas from that period in Dresden, and with a mother lost in the period after the Nazi invasion of Russia, a father who survived the Battle of Stalingrad, saw the period of lawless behaviour in the collapse of the Soviet Union as the"greatest geopolitical disaster of the century."  Putin and people around him made missteps and miscalculations launching a war in Ukraine, leading to the situation today- jeopardizing hard won gains for the Russian economy. By 2022 Russian standards of living had risen and the economy was in the best shape it had been in the modern period since the Industrial Revolution. Yet largely exposed because of the dependence on oil and gas during a period of climate change and focus on building future economies free of fossil fuels.  Putin in his own peculiar logic may have seen this as the only opportunity in 2022 before deliinking from fossil fuel reduced the importance of the Russian fuel dependent economy to make some territorial readjusments in Ukraine with a quick war taking Kviv. That turned into a massive miscalculation with the emergence of nationalist fervor in western Ukraine spreading to the whole country of 40 million people. In the future to 2030 with phasing out of the fossil fuel economy, Russia without the connections to the US and European Union's technology and resources it had during Putin's three terms, and facing strict sanctions from US and EU, faces a difficult future. This has cautionary lessons for all countries- the US that read too much into the fall of the Berlin wall and indulged in a losing proposition with free markets that damaged its infrastructure and manufacturing with shifts to China, China understanding of how it to was dependent on the world economy for its future development, India that had to navigate a difficult period and what lessons to draw for building a bigger economy, the EU realizing the failure of its policies of depending on Russia for energy and China for manufacturing with fragile supply chains,  and Russia that there were twists and turns and the need for safeguards and experience building democratic processes before these processes would work for the economy, its people and for Russia as a nation. ...
The Guardian Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The India Pakistan issues have already evolved into India China issues. And the competition between the US and China has consequences for India, the European Union and the rest of the world. As the US seeks to regain its industrial base and reduce overconcentration of manufacturing in China, India is at the stage of a manufacturing effort that is similar to Japan's in the 1920's and 1970's and China's in the 1990's. It will take place over the next two decades. This is the crucial event for Asia that will see the emergence of not two but three nations in Asia- Japan, China and India as modern manufacturing nations.  The talk about military action popular in the media misrepresents the real issues which are economic and ignore the turning point in 2025 with the Ukraine war putting the European Union and Germany's position of concentration of production in China as untenable. For the US DJT represents a second effort to bring serious manufacturing back to the US and allies such as India. This will be the deciding change in Asia and the world by 2030, 2035 and 2040, as India will make the decisive change to a modern nation similar to the US and Europe. This will open up opportunities for 1.4 billion people in India and a related 300 million people in Indonesia. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Russian president Putin tells Russians at an annual news conference on Dec. 17, 2014, that the West wanted to deprive Russia of its natural resources. He says steps taken by the central bank and his administration were proper, including avoiding capital controls, except that the decision to raise interest rates to 17% in mid-Dec. should have been taken earlier. He deflects criticism that the sanctions and the decline in the ruble were "payment for Crimea" (Russia's takeover of the Crimea) by saying it was "payment for our independence, our sovereignty." Putin expressed unease with the expansion of NATO to Russia's borders. He told Russians to expect that the crisis will last for 2 years and during this time the Russian economy will adapt, in particular shifting its heavy dependence on oil exports. During the 10 years of the Putin administration since 2004, Russia has not made a vigorous effort to diversify away from oil dependence. Progress was made primarily in better integrating the economy with the European Union, entry into WTO, building a sovereign reserves fund, until the crisis in Ukraine. The Putin years may be seen in the future as the transition years towards a more diversified economy, and may lead to a shift away from the kind of management of economic and foreign policy by a single leader that may have led to the disruption in relations with Germany, a critical economic partner for Russia. Chancellor Merkel said Germany would continue to support sanctions as long as Russia opposed the right of self- determination of people in Europe and European values. Germany continues even now to maintain dialogue with Russia through Social Democrat Foreign Minister Steinmeier, which is why Putin continues to refer to it as "our partners" and cites the differences with our partners, very different from the Cold War period when no such close relations with Germany existed. ...
Economist Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A steady decline in the price of Brent crude from $115 to $92 in the period from June to October 2014. Slow or no economic growth in Europe, and declining growth in China was the main reason. A cut in oil price by Saudi Arabia in September with lack of coordination in OPEC to control supplies when prices are declining, and increasing supplies from the U.S., provided additional basis for price declines. This price decline comes as large energy companies invested heavily in mega-projects to bring more oil supplies when prices were up to $128 by mid-2012. Consulting company EY estimate is that there are 163 such mega projects worth $1.1 trillion underway, most behind schedule and over budget. The projects were based on oil prices being over $100. Oil field development costs are increasing rapidly. Douglas Westwood, a consulting firm, estimate is that productivity of upstream capital spending has fallen by a factor of 5 since 2000, declining by 5% a year, as oilfield equipment and services demand exceeds supply. Greater technological sophistication also adds to cost such as Shell's Nobel Bully platform for deep sea drilling. See link- Noble Bully. Oil majors are now cutting spending, and some planned big projects are on hold. About $300 billion in assets may be up for sale. Shell plans to cut spending by 20% in 2014, Exxon and Chevron 5-6%. Shale oil projects in America need about $57 to be profitable with an internal rate of return of 10%, by one estimate. Yet this is an average and does not reflect differing producer costs. This estimate does not reflect the high cost producers, some of whom need closer to $110....

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